Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Thomas Shey" data-source="post: 9867086" data-attributes="member: 7026617">I'm not denigrating it per se.  I've just got two fairly big issues with it, but they're both from where I sit and don't expect them to matter to anyone else necessarily.  At least one of them is a big enough deal I'd have serious problems playing in a game as a player or a GM where they were done radically different from my preference on it though.1. I think requiring all social and mental tasks to be, fundamentally about the player and not the character (i.e. having no PC skill involvement in the process) is tying the hands of too many character concepts to be tolerable.  I don't fault if other people prefer to play that way (that's the way D&D handled them for decades after all) but I'm not at all interested in going there.2. The one-way thing on social skills vis-a-vis PCs/NPCs makes my brain itch, and I think there are ways to handle the effect of social skills that don't require grabbing the wheel away from whoever is operating the character, so I don't think its necessary.  Mind you, this sort of thing is relatively rarely implimented that way, but that just means these parts of rules should be designed better, not that they shouldn't exist.  That said, because so many of these kinds of rules are often written broadly or vaguely, I have more sympathy here than I do with the first part with other people's views.</blockquote>