Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="molepunch" data-source="post: 5769387" data-attributes="member: 6683467">@<a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/member.php?u=17061" target="_blank">Jawsh</a>  of course it's gonna veer towards silly or boring TTs if the designers don't know when to stop. I mean, how many ice-cream flavors do you really need, right?TTs are not inherently bogus or flavorless, so I only agree with you in the context of game designers doing... well... bad game design.As for your criticism about talents and how it can translate into verisimilitude, in my example Shield Bash just means you are able to "hit someone with your shield" in a skilled way in fluff, and in crunch, gives you a powerful ability that stuns or what-have-you. Of course you can "hit someone with a shield" without that Talent anyway. You should. Similarly, it would be laughable if one cannot breathe without the Breathe talent. I'm not sure if you're just trying to be funny or you're serious (no sarcasm). Shield Finesse might translate to the character being able to deftly wield a shield so that it's no longer cumbersome (no more penalty to checks, for example), and sets the character to be able to use a higher damage dice if attacking with the shield.Again, let's assume we are talking about good game design that makes sense in crunch and fluff: tightly set TTs can be a great idea, IMO. Stupidly designed TTs are of course a bad idea, but not because they are TTs.Just my thoughts <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