Should there be an XP expenditure or other way to gain Aptitudes. Would it be game breaking? What should it cost if not? Awarded like fate points? Could you buy it for only certain skills? Could you use XP to trade out aptitudes? (500xp to no longer have fieldcraft and take willpower as an aptitude)
Edited by JoekerShould there be an XP expenditure or other way to gain Aptitudes.
Just buying Aptitudes sounds very game-breaking to me, though not necessarily in a "this will make the game stop working" kind of way, but rather that it lowers the uniqueness of characters by making them more samey as everyone's set of Aptitudes starts to resemble one another.
Trading Aptitudes would be something else, though I'd only allow this at the start of a game. It doesn't make much sense for a character to suddenly lose a proficiency. Perhaps you could allow the player to pay off those 500 XP over time so as to not make them too weak at the start of the game. Instead, you'd just detract 50 XP every time he or she earns experience, and after doing it ten times, they're in the green again. Like an XP credit, if you will.
Alternatively, I noticed Elite Advances tend to give an additional Aptitude for free. So perhaps there could be a "Throne Agent" Elite Advance that marks veteran acolytes, and rather than coming with a fixed one, it allows the player to add any Aptitude to their character as some sort of special Inquisitorial training to "unlock their hidden potential" *handwave*?
As a bonus, you'd now also have a default Go-To Elite Advance for anyone who doesn't know what else to pick.
Buying Aptitudes would be a bad move. They aren't a bad system in and of themselves, people just seem to feel entitled to everything being as cheap as possible. The only people who would benefit from purchasing Aptitudes would be Min/Maxers, and they already have so much support in this game they don't need anything else.
Just buying Aptitudes sounds very game-breaking to me, though not necessarily in a "this will make the game stop working" kind of way, but rather that it lowers the uniqueness of characters by making them more samey as everyone's set of Aptitudes starts to resemble one another.
I have played many classless systems. Systems where each advance had the same cost for everybody. I have never seen players build characters that felt similar to each other. The closest I've come is a system where dexterity was really overpowered but, even then, the high dex characters were significantly different from each other in their non-dex stats.
So if that problem happens, it sounds like it's a problem with the players you are playing with. One likely to be made worse with aptitudes as minmaxers will spend the time figuring out which aptitudes serve them best and, since aptitudes encourage them to focus their builds more, they will be more likely to converge on the same build.
As for roleplayers, lets imagine one with a character that would best fit being a penitent sororitas. The lore fits as Sisters Repentia exist. The bonus ability fits. As for the aptitudes, lets just quote the post you made about them :
I almost want to nominate the Penitent as well, as the special ability is quite fitting for members of the Sisterhood, but the Aptitudes seem rather sub-optimal, given how they include neither WS or BS.
Is it really a good thing that aptitudes provide mechanical reasons to discourage lore fitting character creation choices ?
Buying Aptitudes would be a bad move. They aren't a bad system in and of themselves, people just seem to feel entitled to everything being as cheap as possible. The only people who would benefit from purchasing Aptitudes would be Min/Maxers, and they already have so much support in this game they don't need anything else.
I agree. Buying aptitudes is not the solution. Minmaxers will spend the time before the game to plan out when it is the optimal time to buy a new aptitude. So they will be rewarded for their planning. Rewarding minmaxers for their planning only encourages them.
Roleplayers, especially those who pick advances on what their character would want to be better at, are less likely to have their advances planned far enough ahead to know if buying an aptitude saves xp in the long run. Unless you refund the XP difference between what a skill cost when it was purchased and what it would have cost if they always had the aptitude they just purchased, but that's a lot of bookkeeping that doesn't fit with the lore at all.
The reason I see removing aptitudes as an option is that it greatly reduces the reward for the planning a minmaxer might do.
Just buying Aptitudes sounds very game-breaking to me, though not necessarily in a "this will make the game stop working" kind of way, but rather that it lowers the uniqueness of characters by making them more samey as everyone's set of Aptitudes starts to resemble one another.
I have played many classless systems. Systems where each advance had the same cost for everybody. I have never seen players build characters that felt similar to each other. The closest I've come is a system where dexterity was really overpowered but, even then, the high dex characters were significantly different from each other in their non-dex stats.
So if that problem happens, it sounds like it's a problem with the players you are playing with. One likely to be made worse with aptitudes as minmaxers will spend the time figuring out which aptitudes serve them best and, since aptitudes encourage them to focus their builds more, they will be more likely to converge on the same build.
As for roleplayers, lets imagine one with a character that would best fit being a penitent sororitas. The lore fits as Sisters Repentia exist. The bonus ability fits. As for the aptitudes, lets just quote the post you made about them :
I almost want to nominate the Penitent as well, as the special ability is quite fitting for members of the Sisterhood, but the Aptitudes seem rather sub-optimal, given how they include neither WS or BS.Is it really a good thing that aptitudes provide mechanical reasons to discourage lore fitting character creation choices ?
Buying Aptitudes would be a bad move. They aren't a bad system in and of themselves, people just seem to feel entitled to everything being as cheap as possible. The only people who would benefit from purchasing Aptitudes would be Min/Maxers, and they already have so much support in this game they don't need anything else.
I agree. Buying aptitudes is not the solution. Minmaxers will spend the time before the game to plan out when it is the optimal time to buy a new aptitude. So they will be rewarded for their planning. Rewarding minmaxers for their planning only encourages them.
Roleplayers, especially those who pick advances on what their character would want to be better at, are less likely to have their advances planned far enough ahead to know if buying an aptitude saves xp in the long run. Unless you refund the XP difference between what a skill cost when it was purchased and what it would have cost if they always had the aptitude they just purchased, but that's a lot of bookkeeping that doesn't fit with the lore at all.
The reason I see removing aptitudes as an option is that it greatly reduces the reward for the planning a minmaxer might do.
I never played DH1, but I see how the character progression is a double-edged sword. On one hand, people can't really Min/Max the best possible "builds" because they are locked into a tree. On the other hand, you are locked into a tree.
The Aptitudes system is a good idea on paper, but the implementation seems to heavily favor min/maxing and just serve to piss everyone else off. I for one don't really mind it, but the way Aptitudes are assigned means people will clamor for anything that gives access to cheaper Dodge and combat abilities.
Case in point would be how they are handled in Only War, which is my favorite example. Hammer of the Emperor introduces the concept of Advanced Specialties which you can change to every 2500 XP. These give you new Aptitudes, Talents, and gear, but you can keep all the advances you've already taken. The result? Players who realize the glaring weakness of the system can just run the gamut of Advanced Specialties, picking up whatever is cheapest at their current spot. This means everyone is functionally the same build because they've all been a Brawler/Scout/Marksman and thus picked up BS/WS/AG, Stealth and Dodge for next to nothing.
Which is a very roundabout example of why any means of gaining Aptitudes after character creation is a very, very bad idea.
I like lynata's idea of a throne Agent general elidte advance, even if it sounds vanilla.
As for roleplayers, lets imagine one with a character that would best fit being a penitent sororitas. The lore fits as Sisters Repentia exist. The bonus ability fits. As for the aptitudes, lets just quote the post you made about them :
I almost want to nominate the Penitent as well, as the special ability is quite fitting for members of the Sisterhood, but the Aptitudes seem rather sub-optimal, given how they include neither WS or BS.Is it really a good thing that aptitudes provide mechanical reasons to discourage lore fitting character creation choices ?
But isn't that more of a problem with the available packages rather than the Aptitude system in general?
The system itself is sound, it just doesn't always combine the "correct" assets for said lore-fitting character choice. Also see my rant about the Ace, or rather the Operate Skill (which I only now realise is a pretty poor representation of the lore).
I like lynata's idea of a throne Agent general elidte advance, even if it sounds vanilla.
Working as intended!
I think min-maxing wouldn't be as prevalent if the system didn't encourage you to be smart with your aptitudes so much. The main example being how expensive "no matching aptitude talents and skills" are.
200, 300 and then 600 xp (which is a pain if you want to get ambidextrous, but don't have the arbitrary WS and BS) and it keeps going up, skills can be pretty pricey too
If it was balanced a bit better, people wouldn't feel as much need to care about "maxing" everything out for return, because the barriers to clear for something you messed up on aren't so steep.
Btw, how does this look for talent apts by tier and matching?
200/300/400
300/400/600
400/600/800
Yet the difference between non-matching aptitude talents and skills is no greater than it already was in DH1 ...
Yet the difference between non-matching aptitude talents and skills is no greater than it already was in DH1 ...
But the ease of min/maxing in DH2 means any restrictions provoke a great wailing and gnashing of teeth.
Just give everyone all aptitudes. Players are free to choose the same home world/background/role if they want, and if you ban that then you can also ban them making identical characters. If you're worried about players getting "samey" from playing for a long time, that will be unavoidable. You can make some "gating" mechanisms, such as only allowing players to count as having ANY aptitude for tier 1 talents, then after spending X amount of XP or playing X sessions or finishing X adventures, they unlock all aptitudes for tier 2 talents, and so on. If a player hasnt reached that threshold, they just use aptitudes as normal.