Posts from Expedition: general discussions. Auto-translated

2) Honestly, if you can't multiclass with at least one other profession, then I'm more likely to be against it. Because often, the concept is more complex than what's available in the list of classes. But again, if there's enough variability within a class when leveling up, then even without multiclassing, it should be fine.

Example of what I like (Pathfinder Kingmaker, I don't know any other systems close to D&D): any classes choosing their own magic slots when leveling up, namely inquisitors, bards, priests, etc.

Example of what I don't like: leveling up ordinary warriors, barbarians, etc. is boring. The choice of minor talents is clearly not enough.

3) EVEN MORE COMPLEX?
Seriously, some kind of flexible system where you can estimate the result of any action in your head based on the character's stats/skills would be cool.

I also once thought about something like completely free character generation. That is, so that players say what ability (abilities) they want, and the GM determines their strength, limitations, and possible weaknesses numerically, based on ideas about balance and the physics of the world. Then it is entered into the character sheet, and we play. But this seems incredibly difficult to implement.

In any case, it doesn't make sense to make battles particularly more complicated. Of course, it would be possible to make a system for turning characters like in RI3, for example, but that's it, and not necessarily.

The GM determined their strength, limitations, and possible weaknesses numerically, based on ideas about balance and the physics of the world. Then it is recorded in the character list, and we play. But this seems incredibly complex to implement.

Leveling up should not be a core element, and a new character should be weaker than a fully leveled one, say, two to three times weaker, no more.

2. The main drawback of the class system is that characters of the same class are often very similar. This can be solved by making the system more complex and extensive, but in the case of experience points and manual calculations, we can hardly afford it.

Plus, as Ment has already noted, the concept often doesn't fit into the class.

There are no other default actions that a character could perform (say, try to push an opponent to another position) or creative uses of abilities with vague wording (say, use magic to turn a piece of a stone column into mud and collapse the ceiling).

In principle, this sounds interesting, but the downside is that the GM will often have to determine the mechanics of such things on the fly. For example, a column and a ceiling should have a certain number of hit points, and the mage needs to inflict enough damage with his earth magic for his action to work. The number of hit points will have to be invented on the spot. I personally like this, but won't there be complaints later in the thread that some ceiling is too strong and couldn't be collapsed in one turn?

Automatic success of any "creative" action is also not an option.

So, in the end, it's not entirely clear. It's up to you. I would try to anticipate such possibilities in advance
(for example, in the description of the earth beam, I would write that it can destroy objects with a mass of no more than X, etc.)

I don't quite understand the point of this "hit point" system when the emphasis is on creativity and adapting to the situation. The player asks if they can do something – the GM immediately answers whether it's possible (although they might conceal it, of course), deciding for themselves how many uses are needed (if the effect will even work). Hit points are a completely foreign concept here. They would make sense, for example, if the player wanted to knock a chandelier onto an opponent with an arrow (and then the GM would have to figure out what and how, if they haven't already devised a system for such cases), but not here.

Well, for example, with greater flexibility of actions in combat. Let's say, in the expansions, we usually have a wargame-like system, and the characters are limited only to movement, using items, attacking, or using some ability that has a specific effect in numbers. There are no other default actions that a character could perform (for example, try to push an opponent to another position) or creative uses of abilities with a vague description (for example, use magic to turn a piece of a stone column into mud and collapse the ceiling).

I was thinking about something and came up with a few questions, and I would be interested to hear the answers from players:
1) Do you prefer systems with linear progression (like classes and levels) or a more typical experience system without classes and clear progression, where there may not be much character development, or it is heavily tied to luck and other similar aspects?
2) How do players feel about the concept of classes in general, regardless of the approach to progression?
3) Are players interested in systems that are more flexible/complex than usual in expeditions?

Kicking into the abyss, by the way, can also not be considered particularly creative, and can be introduced into the system in any case. Just it is better to prescribe such a possibility in advance (like, accuracy check against agility + strength against resistance => successfully kicked), otherwise some NPC will kick someone of us and there will be another uproar.