|
I gave it 5 stars becaue people think that if it is not that it should be ignored.
Befiore i go further, I will add that I like the art.
If I were to be honest, I would give the content 3 stars. Why? Because, to me, it feels like something that would be in a blog post, adding about that much to a game. That saiid, when considering whether or not to use the rule, having considered this content will help you keep your game fun without making a bad choice. Several years ago I was against the specialization rule as it felt like punishing the characters and giving them an advancemnt tax just to do things that they should already be able to do. Later on, it clicked. It is just redefining the zero. I have used the specialization rules in a few campaigns and, while I agree with most of this content, there is one point that I disagree.
wholeheartedly feel that Common Knowledge should use it in every game. It used to be just a Smarts roll, but SWADE made it into a skill. At first I was not so sure. But then I realized, if it always has a specializaiton then it can give the cahracter a flavor. You could go by concept with an all-in-one like "Elven warrior" or you could branch it out a bit in your campaign, giving Elves "Elf" for their cultuier and "Warrior" (or whatever) fior their profession. I have found that to work very well for the past several campaigns that I have used it.
|
Log In 
