tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5377543525075660166.post9078510358133516581..comments2024-03-26T22:17:42.458-04:00Comments on Semper Initiativus Unum: Playing the SpecialistsWayne Rossihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11347401495298367324noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5377543525075660166.post-39023598788653803072013-08-04T03:27:36.819-04:002013-08-04T03:27:36.819-04:00I'm starting to lean more and more toward clas...I'm starting to lean more and more toward classless systems in which your character has nigh-infinite customizibility. But, then again, that brings in all sorts of different problems.<br /><br />Roll-based task-resolution systems really got going with the thief, it seems. When I played with Dennis in S. Korea, we had to play really, really smart. Constantly ask questions. Give detailed explanations for our actions. Don't just say, "I open the chest" but explain how you open it. Listen at doors, see if you can peer through keyholes, tell the DM you're looking for oddly shaped bricks or tiles in the floor, etc. If you're going to be playing an OS game, I find it FORCES you to start playing really intelligently in order to avoid getting killed! I can totally see how involving a thief with a roll-based resolution system can really put a damper on that.Dave Cesaranohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01454928720043301400noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5377543525075660166.post-5160625143372996872013-08-03T13:39:03.511-04:002013-08-03T13:39:03.511-04:00Most of the time, the referee's choice decides...Most of the time, the referee's choice decides which version is used.<br /><br />Personally, I value parsimony but allow options - for instance I've run Holmes D&D where a player used a ranger from Strategic Review / Best of the Dragon and nothing untoward happened.<br /><br />One thing I was thinking of doing is to take the specialist from Lamentations of the Flame Princess, change it up a bit and make it more like a spy class to replace the thief, which I find interesting in concept but lacking in execution. I agree about interaction and don't let thieves roll for "find traps" except when checking door locks and things of that nature.Wayne R.https://www.blogger.com/profile/04118962136054206381noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5377543525075660166.post-22793405492795510612013-08-03T12:18:43.513-04:002013-08-03T12:18:43.513-04:00The problem with more character classes is rules b...The problem with more character classes is rules bloat. If the only two classes you have are fighting-man and magic-user, there's really not a lot of choice but a lot of simplicity and ease of play. Look at 3rd edition or Palladium/RIFTS with the myriad of classes. Options are great, yeah, but what happens to game balance? If you aren't worried about balance, great, but as a DM/GM/etc. dozens upon dozens of classes make it hard to prepare and plan because you may have a player that simply uses a special skill to bypass 90% of a challenge.<br /><br />I get this feeling that the OSR doesn't exactly know where to draw the line, or at least where that line is drawn is subject to individual tastes. Since BECMI and white box are so different, what happens when a white box DM plays with a BECMI enthusiast? But I digress...<br /><br />It seems to me that, since the OSR seems to cleave to the "less is more" philosophy, OSR enthusiasts should try to streamline the player options as much as possible to facilitate faster, simpler play that is heavier on the abstract player-DM interaction for various action and task resolutions outside of combat. Specialist classes invariably introduce mechanics (like the thief does) that hijack that interaction and, in my opinion, actually start dragging the OS game more toward 2nd and 3rd edition play styles inadvertently.Dave Cesaranohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01454928720043301400noreply@blogger.com