tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-681509622212079331.post3401156158075433257..comments2023-05-09T17:43:00.019+02:00Comments on The City of Iron: A simple attribute-based skills / "good at" systemGavin Normanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12362875699031245377noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-681509622212079331.post-67110161230028168362012-05-24T22:22:55.729+02:002012-05-24T22:22:55.729+02:00Huh? Do you have a Pugilist class that needs writi...Huh? Do you have a Pugilist class that needs writing up then? (I'm your man! ;)Gavin Normanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12362875699031245377noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-681509622212079331.post-72629025327577902552012-05-24T20:44:57.308+02:002012-05-24T20:44:57.308+02:00"I mean, I could of course create some kind o..."I mean, I could of course create some kind of alternative classes, but for a short campaign of a few months it doesn't seem worth bothering :)"<br /><br />You can't fight the urge... it's in your blood! I'll be looking forward to your write-up of my Pugilist class. ;)Yves Geenshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10188643291257114336noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-681509622212079331.post-31120856228314563212012-05-24T20:44:22.026+02:002012-05-24T20:44:22.026+02:00This comment has been removed by the author.Yves Geenshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10188643291257114336noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-681509622212079331.post-11871343920405994522012-05-24T18:24:51.070+02:002012-05-24T18:24:51.070+02:00Yes you're probably right :) I guess I was usi...Yes you're probably right :) I guess I was using the term (slightly incorrectly) to mean someone who's skilled at <i>cheating</i> at cards by sleight of hand, etc.Gavin Normanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12362875699031245377noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-681509622212079331.post-62945596640780743992012-05-24T16:55:49.091+02:002012-05-24T16:55:49.091+02:00Looks good to me.
I just thought I'd pipe up ...Looks good to me.<br /><br />I just thought I'd pipe up long enough to say that the "card shark" skill might be more of a mental attribute (judging the odds, reading bluffs, intuition) unless you are actively "slight of hand" cheating (hiding cards up your sleeve using Dex).Quibishhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13566050970164487157noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-681509622212079331.post-60203907613230821302012-05-24T13:53:20.369+02:002012-05-24T13:53:20.369+02:00Hey Alex, yes I'm a big fan of Jack's d100...Hey Alex, yes I'm a big fan of Jack's d100 professions table too! I was actually imagining using a simple profession / background system <i>as well</i> as the skills system I described. The idea was that the skills would just emphasise specialised areas of experience / knowledge. So it wouldn't be that a character with low attributes could do nothing at all...<br /><br />I dunno, it might be easier to just let each player choose 5 or 6 things their character's good at. I liked the idea of somehow tying it to attributes though (in the same way INT traditionally grants extra languages -- that was the inspiration for this idea).<br /><br />Re: classes... in a setting without spells (either MU or cleric), and where thief skills would be subsumed into the professions / "good at" skills, I don't see what role classes would play. I mean, I could of course create some kind of alternative classes, but for a short campaign of a few months it doesn't seem worth bothering :)Gavin Normanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12362875699031245377noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-681509622212079331.post-75356291956381022932012-05-24T11:52:19.850+02:002012-05-24T11:52:19.850+02:00Hm... Tales of the Grotesque and Dungeonesque are ...Hm... <a href="http://talesofthegrotesqueanddungeonesque.blogspot.com/" rel="nofollow">Tales of the Grotesque and Dungeonesque</a> are house-rules for a "gothic fantasy" campaign. Even if you don't use much of it, I like the <b>Character Background Table</b> with d100 entries; I guess it's similar to how a profession is used to in Barbarians of Lemuria. I liked this aspect of the Barbarians of Lemuria rules very much. I think I might like such as system better than what you proposed: broad non-weapon proficiencies (haha) independent of the attributes you rolled. It allows for exchanges like the following at the table: "Ok, I'm a wiccan – maybe I will recognize the sign?" And it prevents exchanges like the following: "I rolled low, my character sucks!"<br /><br />I'm not sure I'd ditch classes. Boxer vs. academic = fighter vs. sage or something like that?Alex Schroederhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17104864340940538702noreply@blogger.com