Possible Fix for Aptitudes

[craftomega 16]

Looking at the aptitude system it feels at times like a system with a lot of un-used potential. A simple fix would be to have 2-3 secondary aptitudes for each Skill/Talent/Characteristic.

 

The system would still be the same you can only claim one Aptitude from each column when spending XP. But it would make the system more flexible.

 

Ex:

 

Current

 

Name---------Aptitude 1------Aptitude 2

Awareness---Perception----Fieldcraft

Toughness---Toughness-----Defence

Disarm--------Weapon Skill--Defence

 

New system

 

Name----------Aptitude 1-----Aptitude 2

Awareness---Perception----Fieldcraft/Knowledge

Toughness---Toughness-----Defence/Willpower

Disarm--------Weapon Skill--Defence/Finesse

 

Thoughts? If people think this is a good idea ill make a homebrew sheet with all the edits.

Edited September 7, 2014 by craftomega

[Fgdsfg 1,017]

Having "and/or" Aptitudes was always a bit of an easy fix, and I have no idea why they didn't use it themselves. Sometimes, it makes complete sense why a skill would have multiple potential Aptitudes, but for whatever reason, they don't.

I have my own custom Skills Table (which despite the name is in fact not finished) and the idea of having multiple Aptitudes have been there from the beginning, I couldn't imagine it any other way.

[craftomega 16]

Having "and/or" Aptitudes was always a bit of an easy fix, and I have no idea why they didn't use it themselves. Sometimes, it makes complete sense why a skill would have multiple potential Aptitudes, but for whatever reason, they don't.

I have my own custom Skills Table (which despite the name is in fact not finished) and the idea of having multiple Aptitudes have been there from the beginning, I couldn't imagine it any other way.

 

OK I am glad I am not going crazy, it did seem like a supid easy/simple solution to a very annoying problem.

Edited September 7, 2014 by craftomega

[Objulen 6]

Since this will generally just make everything cost less, it's more suitable for a higher power level game where players will get more faster and/or have more roles in the group than normal. 

[craftomega 16]

Since this will generally just make everything cost less, it's more suitable for a higher power level game where players will get more faster and/or have more roles in the group than normal. 

 

A simple solution to that would be to reward less experince.

[Objulen 6]

 

Since this will generally just make everything cost less, it's more suitable for a higher power level game where players will get more faster and/or have more roles in the group than normal. 

 

A simple solution to that would be to reward less experince.

 

 

It can help to a degree. It does beg the question, though: if you're going to make tweaks that'll keep everything the same, why change things in the first place?

[Myrion 541]

It doesn't keep it the same. It makes more things "medium expensive" and then makes sure that this doesn't mean that you buy many more things.

Personally I think that aptitudes should have been set up such that a few things are expensive, some things are cheap and most things are "regular price".
That way you would get a relatively clear character concept that you're encouraged to invest in, a few things marked "not your thing" but otherwise you're free to build your character. If that meant getting less experience to keep me from turning all-powerful too soon, I'm fine with this.

[cps 686]

Personally I think that aptitudes should have been set up such that a few things are expensive, some things are cheap and most things are "regular price".

That way you would get a relatively clear character concept that you're encouraged to invest in, a few things marked "not your thing" but otherwise you're free to build your character. If that meant getting less experience to keep me from turning all-powerful too soon, I'm fine with this.

 

This is exactly how it was in the original beta. For skills, anyway. Talents had a flat cost but you had to buy your way through a tree, which encouraged specialization in a different way.

[Myrion 541]

*sigh* That really was a "baby with the bathwater" moment, eh?

The ruleset could really use that juvenat treatment...

[Vaeron 24]

I like the aptitude system. Not everyone can be good at everything. I'm sure someone will come up with an and/or house rule and share with the community at some point, but I definitely don't think the game is harmed with the current setup. It definitely beats the ridiculously restrictive talent trees from the beta, where you couldn't use suppressive fire without first purchasing overwatch, rite of clearing, independent targeting, and bulging biceps in that specific order.

[RolfSoldaat 2]

Instead of messing around with the aptitudes, why not just adjust the advancement cost tables? The real issue here is the large disparity in xp cost of the different aptitude categories, correct?

[Keffisch 2,642]

Yup,

That is how I see it as well.

The aptitudes are fine in and of themselves, the XP cost, not so much.