[Bronze] 'skills' and task/conflict resolution

[dindenver]

Hi!
  I think that you have to make an effort to differentiate them from Feats (D&D), but barring that minor hurdle, they sound great. Players can potentially make really individualized characters.
  I think it is a mechanic that demands playtesting, but in the end, I think its more than worth it.

[stefoid]

Just had a look at D&D feats (never played D&D before).  its essentially the same idea.  emphasis is obviously on combat and progression through a tree of related abilities.  The points of differentiation would freedom to choose any kind of play you wanted, and emphasis on different types of play: rule breaker or stake setter.  Feats seem to be all rule breakers from the few examples I saw.  would you agree?

[stefoid]

Actually, there are a few ways to approach the specialization thing.

HeroWars says just take a bunch of 'keywords' which can basicly come from any category.  i.e. warror, axeman, etc...  but why would you take axeman which is a specialist kind of keyword when warrior adequately covers fighting in general?  what does taking axeman give you that warrior does not?

The signature plays Im proposing have very narrow applicability.  they are almost like specific tasks or mini-conflicts, eg: a character from a warrior background could have three plays which emphasise his specialization with an axe such as 'shield split', 'whirlwind' and 'axe missile'  (just making these up)

an alternative is to broaden a characters specializations from specific plays to something like herowars  "warrior - axeman", but to give 'axeman' and other speciaizations some rules backing.  perhaps axeman allows any number of improvized plays involving axe fighting.  similarly jackie chan has the broader specialziation of 'acrobatic agility'  which covers climbing walls like a monkey and a bunch of other stuff
??