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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="mmadsen" data-source="post: 184662" data-attributes="member: 1645">I love the way you put that, and I think it really gets at the allure of Feats.  Having more Hit Points might make you more powerful, but it's so bland.  Getting to Whirlwind attack a horde of Orcs -- now that's...more fun than a barrel of monkeys.I basically like the skill system too, but it shares a common flaw with many other game systems, and one that a class system should be able to work around.  If all your skills come from the same shared pot of skill points, then you naturally min-max based on what you expect to encounter and what should be most useful.  That's the bane of point-based character-generation, right?  Older versions of D&D basically had this right: you had no rules for noncombat skills. That way you assumed the Cleric could lead his flock, the Wizard could read ancient manuscripts, the Fighter could fletch his arrows, etc. If Aragorn the Ranger needs to recount the lineage of the kings of Gondor, he just does. Ideally, I guess, background skills could come from a separate pool, or they could be tied to class level like Bardic Lore, so that Clerics might actually have Knowledge: Religion, the King's Rangers might actually know the history of their land and its leaders, etc.Thanks.  I doubt it would be worth the effort to track Law/Chaos and Good/Evil traits except for Clerics and Paladins, but it could really pay off there.Those systems obviously have very different design goals than D&D though.</blockquote>

Verification