Combat/intellect School System Overhaul

[MonMarty]

Title says it all, the Combat and Intellect School System is being overhauled. The general concept of Combat and Intellect Schools was nice in theory, but in practice is was horrendously narrow minded and really stiffed creativity of the players to create versatile characters or play characters outside of the school box. The new so called Proficiency system should completely remove these issues, while adding increased versatility and increased ease of understanding. This is what is slated to happen:

• Special Permission Registries are disappearing. We are lifting the limits of # of Expert/Champion characters completely. The Trustee system remains unaffected, but all players may have as many Expert characters as they like, and registering special permissions is no longer necessary in any way shape or form.
• Combat and Intellect Schools are being re-modified into so called Academies (though they will still be called Schools for simplicity). These Schools will no longer actually define a character (though there may be some cases like the Viridian Order where they still will), causing the concept of combat to be a concept of a character's backstory, not define the entire character and force them down an archetype.
• The limits of 2 Expert levels for intellect is raised to 3. The limits of combat and intellect expert mixing is removed, and the maximum of any combination of skills is 3. That being said, this is soft capped, obviously a 70 year old expert Viridian, Bloodcast & Blackmark doesn't do any fighting anymore on account of being 70 years old and feemble, while Elves are too physically incapable of reaching that level of combat proficiency.
• The Expert maximum bar is broken up to allow further proficiency levelling so that not everyone is an Expert, but a few people become Expert+ depending on their lifestyle choices.
• Combat and Intellect Skill will be replaced with so called Proficiencies, points allocated to specific skillsets from 0 to 50. This will allow a character to train proficiencies in multiple weapons, or weapons and intellect to create more unique character designs than the limitations currently allow.
• Several schools like Music and Cooking are classified as "Culture Schools" which have their own point allocation system because they aren't considered useful in day-to-day roleplay in Regalia. Such Schools as such become cultural background bonuses.
• Weaknesses and Talents will be completely deleted from Character Applications as they have become null and void. Weaknesses may still be re-used in the optional "Quirks" section however.
• Character App bars (such as the one that currently states you cannot be an Expert or Champion without an App) are disappearing. That being said, we are implementing a new rule that when a Character has proficiencies recorded on the Application, these proficiencies help determine staff stances about powergaming or who would fairly win a fight, therefor characters with recorded proficiencies have preferential treatment.
• A lot of combat schools are being deleted, most of them unpopular or niche. Additionally many weapons are being deleted from the wiki, while new ones are being implemented. Finally, military hardware laws are being loosened in Regalia, allowing for example halberds or crossbows to be used in-rp by Charter members and Slum warriors.
• No more cross referencing pages with confusing starting years, locations and limitations. A lot of combat school limitations such as gender and race are being completely lifted.

TL;DR:

• Permission limits lifted.
• Talents & Weaknesses removed from Character Apps.
• Military Weapon laws loosened to allow more large weapons.
• Schools replaced with a Proficiency Skill allocation System.
• Less IC relevant schools turned into Culture Schools that can be learned in tandem.
• Increased number of high level skills allowed.

But above all: All Character Applications will become unapproved. This sounds very drastic, but it's not as severe as it is implied: In most cases the transition from Schools to Proficiency is relatively fluid and requires minimal adaption of character applications. We have also hired numerous new Lore Staff members to quickly process dozens of apps a day, so that the transition is not that harmful.

Additionally, Magic will not be part of this system, but we will allow a flat rate of proficiency per spell, meaning that battlemages or intellectmages can be designed by players from now on.

More information will be released in the coming days as pages are being pushed one by one, and finally the last post will announce the actual functioning of the system, after which all character apps will be declared Rejected until they are bumped and tagged in need of re-review by players.

The current Work log of categories is recorded below. When all these pages are linked up, the transition is complete and we will publish the system and finalize everything.

• Blades = Published!
• Blunt
• Axes
• Polearms
• Ranged = Published!
• Other Combat
• Art
• Knowledge
• Religious & Arcane
• Leadership
• Science = Published!
• Subterfuge
• Travel

 

[ZiggyStarDusted]

"Winter is coming."

 

[DankDan]

Where do I write my complaint letter?

 

[leafnosedbat]

Where does Alchemy fall in this new system?

 

[SnashuuPomaymay]

Oh.
Oh.

 

[InDogsWeTrust]

Where does Alchemy fall in this new system?

Click to shrink...

It's a Science school

 

[Senpah]

I know this is an odd question, but what is the purpose behind removing talents and weaknesses? I don't see how this is quite helpful because then there would be the possibility of powergaming coming into play and the prohibition of limitations without it being listed on a character app. It might make some characters seem too overpowered or even limitless. With the list of talents and weaknesses we were able to list our limits and know our talents.

 

[Lommey]

garbage 10/10

 

[Faunfire]

Don't tell me that the same thing that happened to mages is gonna happen to fighting people...

 

[Mayaran]

I do not see how this is necessary. The schooling systems worked quite well as they gave the characters clear skill sets. As in, if you were a Tenpenny, you were a good soldier, or if you were a Griffer, you were good in both agility and fencing.
It gave clear skills.

And I do not see the reason to remove talents and weaknesses. It is easier to know how to balance your character if you have their most prominent weaknesses and strengths listed.

In summary; I don't see how this "change" is necessary.

 

[Canaanite]

I do not see how this is necessary. The schooling systems worked quite well as they gave the characters clear skill sets. As in, if you were a Tenpenny, you were a good soldier, or if you were a Griffer, you were good in both agility and fencing.
It gave clear skills.

Click to shrink...

Schools will still exist and give proficiency in the pertinent skills, I.E a Feer-Drakken graduate being knowledgeable with two-handed swords where a griffer will excel with thin blades.

 

[SnugglyKittens]

I know this is an odd question, but what is the purpose behind removing talents and weaknesses? I don't see how this is quite helpful because then there would be the possibility of powergaming coming into play and the prohibition of limitations without it being listed on a character app. It might make some characters seem too overpowered or even limitless. With the list of talents and weaknesses we were able to list our limits and know our talents.

Click to shrink...

Talents & Weaknesses removed from Character Apps.

Click to shrink...

Weaknesses may still be re-used in the optional "Quirks" section however.

Click to shrink...

So, add them in. All this is saying is that it's mostly irrelevent in the application process. I personally found that most of Czylles talents were things she learned through her schools anyway.

 

[XFrostgamingX]

Please do not remove Alte-Hathel, Mastigio, Mekett Ebhula, or Arcol Bow. I want the weapons to stay due to those weapons being my main characters' weapons. @MonMarty .

 

[Faunfire]

Please do not remove Alte-Hathel, Mastigio, Mekett Ebhula, or Arcol Bow. I want the weapons to stay due to those weapons being my main characters' weapons. @MonMarty .

Click to shrink...

What @MonMarty does is out of our control, we can only hope for the best and pray that he doesn't remove the School of Lecgaen

 

[Moribundity]

I agree with those above; I fail to see how this is necessary other than giving mages a boost in how OP they already are. Not to mention the weakness section will essentially no longer become mandatory makes me think that more overpowered characters are going to come out of this.

Combat schools helped regulate things, and kept the whole system simple, in addition. I dislike the point system since it all appears far too confusing, and discouraging towards new players who wanted to make applications, as well as old players.

As mentioned by @Mayaran - the schools gave you defining skills depending on which school your character as a part of.

I also see the combat schools as a defining feature of roleplaying on massive, as few other servers use this system, and a number of other servers use points. Instead of being unique, it feels like massivecraft is generally over-complicating things and jumping on the bandwagon of other generic roleplaying servers.

In conclusion, I am against this change, though if it does go through, I will not leave because of it.

 

[SnugglyKittens]

Not to mention the weakness section will essentially no longer become mandatory makes me think that more overpowered characters are going to come out of this.

Click to shrink...

Ahem.

Weaknesses (OPTIONAL)

• Bullet out the character's Weaknesses with at least three sentences expanding on each.
• For each Weakness, you may assign another Talent to your character, though lore staff will still moderate balance and ultimately have the final say on if your character is balanced or not.
• A Weakness should inherently be a weakness in roleplay of sorts, or some sort of trait that flaws your character.
• You don't need to have any Weaknesses, it's entirely optional. You may simply stick to 3 Talents and leave it at that.

Click to shrink...

• 
  

 

[ElderShrub]

I do not see how this is necessary. The schooling systems worked quite well as they gave the characters clear skill sets. As in, if you were a Tenpenny, you were a good soldier, or if you were a Griffer, you were good in both agility and fencing.
It gave clear skills.

And I do not see the reason to remove talents and weaknesses. It is easier to know how to balance your character if you have their most prominent weaknesses and strengths listed.

In summary; I don't see how this "change" is necessary.

Click to shrink...

If you'll allow me to respond Maya, I've actually discussed the problems I found with the school system before. (This post is a rework of an earlier skype message actually)

Essentially my main problem with the school system was player agency
As the system stood it was near mandatory for characters who wish to be fighters to follow a specific school to the letter. There's not a lot of room for developing different ideas or creating characters that currently didn't have a school written for them. The system was very stifling, and characters in combat were defined by the school they are a part of and not the many other choices a player has made to develop that character.

Many characters also fell outside the school system. For example: A hypothetical Qadir who was a Songaskian slave, worked a brief stint in the army before being retired and becoming a pit fighter, then escaped to Regalia. This character would never fit into a school system, despite in theory being able to exist. I think most people would be fine with this character. Yet trying to shoehorn in a specific combat school (even with private tutors) would be somewhat difficult. Likely this character would be a blend of several different styles. Still they would have distinct weapon preferences and abilities. Such a thing was simply not possible under the school system. This was a shame as it robs players of the ability to choose and develop what could be a core part of their character. Their training and abilities.

Another issue I had with the school system is certain players have different standards for what they want out of CRP. Some players enjoy really flashy theatrical fights. Others prefer a dirty grimy desperate tone to their combat. Others prefer simply to stick to real world understanding of medieval martial arts as closely as possible. It can be really jarring to the latter group when something like "a Feer-Drakken Zweihander can break their pole blade" from the Atraves school comes up. Since this is generally considered nearly impossible in real-world practice. It's fine to say they have a weakness to Zweihanders. But by putting that in there specifically you're removing two players ability to decide how they wish to portray their combat.

TLDR: Players needed more choice over how to choose and portray their combat training. Massive has always been a place that thrives off the ability of players to have great freedom in developing their character without the limitation of overbearing systems.

 

[Mayaran]

One more thing about the weaknesses and talents going under a "quirks" tab.

Weaknesses and talents are NOT quirks. Quirks are things you do out of habit.
A quirk is, let's say, your eyebrow twitches when someone mentions the person you're in love with. Or, you tap your foot repeatedly when you're annoyed.
Quirks are things you do without realizing, but weaknesses and talents are things you are aware of having.
So essentially, putting weaknesses and talents under a "quirks" tab is absolutely ridiculous in a logical sense.

 

[Serpent__]

I really like how the limitations are lifted, but I do agree with others that maybe the weaknesses should be brought back on character apps. Other than that I'm really looking forward to this @MonMarty

 

[5devildragon]

Combat and Intellect Schools are being re-modified into so called Academies (though they will still be called Schools for simplicity). These Schools will no longer actually define a character (though there may be some cases like the Viridian Order where they still will), causing the concept of combat to be a concept of a character's backstory, not define the entire character and force them down an archetype.

Click to shrink...

This I like.

But even as someone who is often too lazy to make a char app and loves himself some combat Rp I kind-of liked the restrictions on champion/expert. By lifting this the amount of Champion-level characters will most likely rise drastically, making most combatants you meet around that level of skill.

 

[FireViper27]

@MonMarty will all the characters be unapproved at once or something else?
by the way this system sounds really cool, not to mention fixing issues I've been having with combat rp.

 

[ElderShrub]

This I like.

But even as someone who is often too lazy to make a char app and loves himself some combat Rp I kind-of liked the restrictions on champion/expert. By lifting this the amount of Champion-level characters will most likely rise drastically, making most combatants you meet around that level of skill.

Click to shrink...

Experts will be determined based on the number of skill-points you put into the ability. That in turn will be determined by age. Sure we'll get a flood of high leveled characters, but the problem with that is they'll be really good at one thing but not so good at anything else. We'll see how it works out. If all is well it should balance itself.

 

[Goldifish]

I can't wait to get creative with all of this. It should work out great for Marie!

 

[Dardy]

snip

Click to shrink...

Not sure if this has been mentioned in here yet, but

If you really think that only because weaknesses are no longer mandatory, it'll allow powergamers to roam free, then you're wrong.
A powergamer will powergame no matter what, even if they had weaknesses listed on their application or not.

In addition, these changes here are decent and needed, of course they may be tweaked here and there, but it'll only be a matter of time until you're used to it again. And then, you'll realize how much easier this rewrite made it.

 

[Eronoc]

Combat and Intellect Skill will be replaced with so called Proficiencies, points allocated to specific skillsets from 0 to 50. This will allow a character to train proficiencies in multiple weapons, or weapons and intellect to create more unique character designs than the limitations currently allow.

Click to shrink...

I absolutely love the concept behind this change. Allowing for more player agency is something that should be emphasized, and this could potentially do that in a major way. As @ElderShrub said, the schools were very specific, and put characters in a box that they might not fit into particularly well. Even worse, everyone had to fit into that same box. This was true not only of combat schools, but intellect schools as well.

Augustin was supposed to have very theoretical, philosophy-based education, but that didn't exactly fit into any particular school at his time of creation. As a result, I eventually settled on "Alchemy and History". The Statesman Schools, which are a bit less restrictive, were a big step in the right direction. However, I think that this was indicative that the system itself was a bit flawed. The fluidity of the Statesmanship schools in comparison to the others showed that the others could do with some fluidity as well. At which point, the system might as well just change.

I'll be very interested to see where this goes.

 

[_Grimmy_]

That in turn will be determined by age.

Click to shrink...

So... The ultimate average warrior elf that can fire any ranged weapon up to a catapult...

 

[NZ_Nix]

Personally, I'm happy to see this update come out, I feel like it was something that was a long time coming and the freedoms granted with it are going to create more positives for the diversity of characters rather than negatives.

causing the concept of combat to be a concept of a character's backstory, not define the entire character

Click to shrink...

My first point in agreeance with @ElderShrub is that with these changes you can be the underdog. A ruffian thug, a former mercenary or an escaped slave fighter, the son of a blacksmith or a squire. Anything's possible now to justify the use of a weapon rather than having to of been trained at an exclusive location within Regalia. Of course, it's still in place that being properly trained with the weapon is going to have its advantages but it allows for folks to justify crime characters or their ordinary people a little more rather than having extravagant backstories sailing to Drowda and living there ect.

No more cross-referencing pages with confusing starting years, locations and limitations. A lot of combat school limitations such as gender and race are being completely lifted.

Click to shrink...

This is a massive uplifter because formerly if you weren't a Unionist, Male, Ailor you really had limited options because then it got incredibly niche. it ties into the above and really if you look at it. It means that you're going to see diversity. There is still a system in place but that's up to the individual to go for a more jack of all trades or specialised route. Not only that but it'll make it so you don't have to solely be a Fighter or an Intellect.

Military Weapon laws loosened to allow more large weapons.

Click to shrink...

I think this is my only concern with this is ensuring that just because people can have it doesn't mean that they are running around with Military weapons because they can. Like polearms and large blades are more reasonable but crossbows I'm on the fence. I already get iffy when people walk around in full plate but that's a discussion I'll avoid. Hopefully, with the lifted restrictions, I hope people will be reasonable about it.

As for what everyone's going on about weaknesses, they were already optional beforehand? We should be able to trust our staff to dictate whether someone is going to be too powerful and to resolve issues of powergaming in game. It is why there's the ticket system if need arise. At the end of the day, you can engage in combat with whoever you want It's roleplay enjoy winning, losing and running a narrative.

 

[Sozzer]

neat

 

[HydraLana]

So... The ultimate average warrior elf that can fire any ranged weapon up to a catapult...

Click to shrink...

Elves will have caps in various areas of the new system because of the longevity issue, they will not be extensive powergaming tools like the way you are worrying about.

 

[PosidonX7]

"Greatswords are excellent at swinging and slashing, but can rarely if ever be used to thrust or stab."
:/ Historically, incorrect.

"Greatswords are excellent at crushing medium range opponents with a flurry of blows, but have practically no defensive capacity to deflect or out strike opponents with faster weapons."
:/ Also historically, incorrect.

This will explain everything. @MonMarty

 

[MonMarty]

"Greatswords are excellent at swinging and slashing, but can rarely if ever be used to thrust or stab."
:/ Historically, incorrect.

"Greatswords are excellent at crushing medium range opponents with a flurry of blows, but have practically no defensive capacity to deflect or out strike opponents with faster weapons."
:/ Also historically, incorrect.

This will explain everything. @MonMarty

Click to shrink...

Thanks! I always appreciate players helping me with understanding the historical accuracy of lore. That being said, I'm not super sure if a single youtube video is really accurate to declare absolute truths, further yet, the question becomes whether this is accurate for gameplay value. For example, oblivion makes great swords slower yet cause more damage to create a distinctive different in actual gamplay value. It's always hard to balance gameplay with accuracy, and usually, the former takes the precedence.

Let me properly thank you for helping me educate myself, by providing you a link to educate yourself:
https://wiki.massivecraft.com/Roleplay_Rules#God_Roleplay

 

[Serpent__]

A little harsh. ._.

 

[AtticCat]

I'm happy, feel bad for @HydraLana tho because he has to deal with another of my infamous character updates. Sorry hydra <3

No, but really, I like the ideas. Good post

​

 

[PosidonX7]

Thanks! I always appreciate players helping me with understanding the historical accuracy of lore. That being said, I'm not super sure if a single youtube video is really accurate to declare absolute truths, further yet, the question becomes whether this is accurate for gameplay value. For example, oblivion makes great swords slower yet cause more damage to create a distinctive different in actual gamplay value. It's always hard to balance gameplay with accuracy, and usually, the former takes the precedence.

Let me properly thank you for helping me educate myself, by providing you a link to educate yourself:
https://wiki.massivecraft.com/Roleplay_Rules#God_Roleplay

Click to shrink...

Funny. I will give you /PLENTY/ more sources then since you are so quick to toss out my historically accurate knowledge upon Zweihander combat.

Spoiler: #NotGodRP Videos

Spoiler: Your Hilarious Interpretation

 

[MonMarty]

Funny. I will give you /PLENTY/ more sources then since you are so quick to toss out my historically accurate knowledge upon Zweihander combat.

Spoiler: #NotGodRP Videos

Spoiler: Your Hilarious Interpretation

Click to shrink...

I sort of just told you that historical accuracy is irrelevant. Gameplay value is more important to me, that is, establishing distinct gameplay values. I understand your desire to intellectually "beat down" me on a thread after I displayed a mild case of lack of self-restraint, but ultimately it is wasted breath. My concerns are more about creating a balanced and interesting gameplay for all players. If a great sword can be wielded with the same proficiency as a longsword then it presents a flat platform for min-maxing that does not serve the co-operative narrative, which as an end-product only rewards god roleplay.

 

[PosidonX7]

I sort of just told you that historical accuracy is irrelevant. Gameplay value is more important to me, that is, establishing distinct gameplay values. I understand your desire to intellectually "beat down" me on a thread after I displayed a mild case of lack of self-restraint, but ultimately it is wasted breath. My concerns are more about creating a balanced and interesting gameplay for all players. If a great sword can be wielded with the same proficiency as a longsword then it presents a flat platform for min-maxing that does not serve the co-operative narrative, which as an end-product only rewards god roleplay.

Click to shrink...

According to the "have practically no defensive capacity to deflect or out strike opponents with faster weapons" part, this would imply the greatsword wielders can easily be beaten by almost anyone, providing an "always-loss" situation for them. This creates an extreme imbalance in combat.

 

[ElderShrub]

Snip

Click to shrink...

Snip

Click to shrink...

Ok folks leave the drama out of this.

I don't want to make this thread about greatsword usage. However Posidon is actually correct. If we want to get into minutiae detail greatswords such as zweihanders really should be classed along with pole-arms. They were used (in combat) primarily by groups such as the Landsknecht or Doppelsoldner, who supplemented pikemen formations in an attempt to break past other pike formations.

However. The best way to go about this honestly would be to give the player a personal choice as to if they wished to use the fantasy depiction of greatswords, or the realistic one. Simply state they are very good against polearms, but not so good in confined spaces or during one on one combat. But don't declare how or why, leave that up to the player. Same thing should be applied to other weapons who have this kind of discrepancy between reality and fantasy. It's the best way to keep everyone happy.

 

[Magivore]

Funny. I will give you /PLENTY/ more sources then since you are so quick to toss out my historically accurate knowledge upon Zweihander combat.

Click to shrink...

You're wrestling a pig in the mud, buddy. In a couple hours, you'll realize the pig likes it.

Nevertheless, is Dark Souls historically accurate? What of Skyrim? Dungeons and Dragons? Settlers of Catan? None of them truly are, but that is the beauty of it. For the sake of balance, realism sometimes must be tossed to prevent everyone from selecting spears and light armour since those ended up ruling later medieval times (which you should take note that Massive isn't actually set in a full medieval scenario). Greatswords deal more damage with less defense, Longsword deal mediocre damage with mediocre defense, Shortswords deal low damage with more defense. You might not like it, but the lore isn't a democratically chosen thing. You can poke and cleave all you want, just know people are going to fight differently (and possibly more effectively) than you.

As for heading back on topic:

• The limits of 2 Expert levels for intellect is raised to 3. The limits of combat and intellect expert mixing is removed, and the maximum of any combination of skills is 3. That being said, this is soft capped, obviously a 70 year old expert Viridian, Bloodcast & Blackmark doesn't do any fighting anymore on account of being 70 years old and feemble, while Elves are too physically incapable of reaching that level of combat proficiency.

• The Expert maximum bar is broken up to allow further proficiency levelling so that not everyone is an Expert, but a few people become Expert+ depending on their lifestyle choices.

• Combat and Intellect Skill will be replaced with so called Proficiencies, points allocated to specific skillsets from 0 to 50. This will allow a character to train proficiencies in multiple weapons, or weapons and intellect to create more unique character designs than the limitations currently allow.

Click to shrink...

While I could see this as being a short-term inconvenience simply for the sake of approving applications, this seems to be a wonderful system. Don't get me wrong, I did like the older combat ideals, but this seems to be almost along the lines of a classic scale like this (which you D&D players and most RPG gamers could easily recognize):

• Strength - 10
• Dexterity - 13
• Constitution - 7
• Intelligence - 10
• Wisdom - 9
• Charisma -11

For those skeptical of the change coming (namely folks such as @Mayaran and @Emo_Bunny ), this will probably settle those in-game discussions a lot faster than having a scenario in which two expert Blackmark + student Lecgaen Strongmen with full-plate armour and tower shields simply keep measuring themselves and pretending they're bigger than the other when, in theory, they're identical. Even if someone has 1 point more than someone else does, that could end arguments right then and there in the same way people tend not to argue after getting a worse roll than their opponent. It's a simple "aw suck a duck," and then the battle rages on.

Look at the differences below, assuming we are working entirely on offensive capabilities:

• Strength - 14 + Longsword VERSUS Strength - 14 + Greatsword = Greatsword wins
  • Strength - 13 + Greatsword1 VERSUS Strength - 12 + Greatsword2 = Greatsword1 wins
    • Strength - 13 + Longsword VERSUS Strength - 13 + Longsword = ??? (but the chances of this are low since you can allocate so many different points and proficiency selections!)
• Expert Longsword + Agility VERSUS Expert Greatsword + Strength = ???
  • Fighter Shortsword + Dagger VERSUS Student Bow + Arrows = Maybe Bow + Arrow if the fighter doesn't get there first
    • Warrior Axes + Rage VERSUS Warrior Axes + Rage = ???

The possibilities of opening things up for 'realism' and 'fantasy' discussion might be entertaining in a Skype chat when you are watching YouTube on the side, but they aren't fun for a scenario that was supposed to be a brief skirmish between a mugger and a soldier who was down on his luck. The first ('new' system) makes everything so much easier to decide, and so much easier to live by. No more 'Expert-Lite' or 'Warrior-Almost' characters that have too many details hidden between the lines! When argument starts, everything can be decided with a snap and characters can now be (with only the distribution of a couple points rather than 5 reasons why you should be interesting):

• Wilfre, the bounty hunter skilled in Mariposa and has a bit of culinary skills under his belt
• Fiske, the intelligent doctor who secretly dabbles in analyzing magics that should never be examined
• Edmond, the wise soldier who has a soft spot for antiques and expensive goods

RATHER THAN

• Wilfre, the Mariposan warrior
• Fiske, the Medicine expert
• Edmond, the Bloodcast Warrior

 

[Sozzer]

According to the "have practically no defensive capacity to deflect or out strike opponents with faster weapons" part, this would imply the greatsword wielders can easily be beaten by almost anyone, providing an "always-loss" situation for them. This creates an extreme imbalance in combat.

Click to shrink...

then dont use a highly specialised weapon in regular combat

 

[FireFan96]

I'm happy to see the removal of the old system. As someone who played Warrior level characters, it always seemed that there were only champion and warrior characters, with half of the levels completely missing. This systems eliminates that classification, which to me makes things more fair in that proficiency will determine who is better, versus the current situation where a 24 year old is the same skill level as a 34 year old. It makes no sense, and I'd rather have a system in place that eliminates these sorts of conflicts so that they don't even need to be brought up.

Of course, I only have what is on this post and whatever recent wiki pages are currently published. But so far I'm liking the idea of being able to customize a character some more.