Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Skills Should Be Core
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Obryn" data-source="post: 6149845" data-attributes="member: 11821"><p>Who in the world are you even replying to with these "simplicity" arguments? I'm coming from a game design angle. D&D's vibrant core is as a class/level game with strong archetypes. The more you add on - skills, feats, free multiclassing, wealth-by-level etc. - the more this core gets diluted and gradually devolves into a crappy implementation of a point-buy system. I'm good with class-specific (and race-specific) feats - anything that enhances the central character archetype - but the more generic fiddly bits you hang around that core, the less coherent your game design gets.</p><p></p><p>So when it comes to Skills, Fighters should do Fightery things, like riding, tactics, and feats of athleticism. Wizards should do Wizardy things, like knowing magical lore. Rogues/Thieves should do your basic skulduggery package. Bards should be great at the "face" stuff. And so on. This is <em>the only reason to have classes and levels</em> - to package all of these features up into neat, simple, discrete packages rather than fiddling around with point-buy.</p><p></p><p>But in answer to your second question - the rules of Dungeons and Dragons should mostly concern themselves with Dungeons (that is, exploration of dangerous places) and Dragons (that is, killing or outsmarting monsters and taking their stuff). That's the core of the game, and still as fun in 2013 as it was in 1974. So, <strong>yes</strong>, I absolutely think those sorts of tasks are more important than a fiddly skill system.</p><p></p><p>I don't want to shut out the players who want "more than a dungeon crawl," but that's why a modular system can be so interesting. Because those options can exist besides the basic ones.</p><p></p><p>-O</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Obryn, post: 6149845, member: 11821"] Who in the world are you even replying to with these "simplicity" arguments? I'm coming from a game design angle. D&D's vibrant core is as a class/level game with strong archetypes. The more you add on - skills, feats, free multiclassing, wealth-by-level etc. - the more this core gets diluted and gradually devolves into a crappy implementation of a point-buy system. I'm good with class-specific (and race-specific) feats - anything that enhances the central character archetype - but the more generic fiddly bits you hang around that core, the less coherent your game design gets. So when it comes to Skills, Fighters should do Fightery things, like riding, tactics, and feats of athleticism. Wizards should do Wizardy things, like knowing magical lore. Rogues/Thieves should do your basic skulduggery package. Bards should be great at the "face" stuff. And so on. This is [I]the only reason to have classes and levels[/I] - to package all of these features up into neat, simple, discrete packages rather than fiddling around with point-buy. But in answer to your second question - the rules of Dungeons and Dragons should mostly concern themselves with Dungeons (that is, exploration of dangerous places) and Dragons (that is, killing or outsmarting monsters and taking their stuff). That's the core of the game, and still as fun in 2013 as it was in 1974. So, [B]yes[/B], I absolutely think those sorts of tasks are more important than a fiddly skill system. I don't want to shut out the players who want "more than a dungeon crawl," but that's why a modular system can be so interesting. Because those options can exist besides the basic ones. -O [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Skills Should Be Core
Top