Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Thomas Shey" data-source="post: 8995482" data-attributes="member: 7026617">Well, do note I was contrasting Fate with older versions of D&D, not 4e.  With 4e it gets, as you say, a lot more complicated in whether 4e is serving your purposes.  Though I'd argue that even with it being one of the most flexible versions of D&D, it still has a lot of D&Disms pretty thoroughly embedded in it.  As an example, try to build a really thorough-going jack-of-all-trades in it.  You can kind of hammer a Rogue into the mold if you're willing to do enough work on it, but it'll be a constant struggle and probably won't really look like that until moderate levels at least.Well, in terms of AD&D and earlier, I'm kind of talking the game as written, not how you could sort of fake other elements the game ignored.  At that point we're effectively talking about different games.  And of course it really, really wanted to keep things inside its lines in terms of things that crossed over from one class to another.That's fair to a point, but I think you're being at least pretty blase about the meaningful descriptive space in the character in B/X and earlier; in practice, if you have to add-in ad-hoc mechanics to make it work, I don't think the system has much wiggle in descriptive space; you're just bolting it on from the outside, and in some areas it will actively resist you.Sure.</blockquote>