[quote=Maxim]
At risk of sounding like a moron ...While I like at least a few of the changes here, I'm sorta worried that this new system is sacrificing a bit too much flexibility and complexity for simplicity. Essentially I think there really need to be more of the old system of traits.Perhaps the biggest example I can think of is Leadership, or really conversation skills in general, seems to be nearly non-existent in the new system. None of those three (except magic with charm spells and such) trait groups have anything that really help with speaking and conversation.Now, before this get's pointed out.While it's a valid point, I feel like there isn't going to be enough help at this point for those who want to play charismatic characters, but are somewhat limited by irl skills.The other minor gripe I have is that, at least from what I'm getting, you have to spend 2/3 traits in order to be a mage at all. My issue with this is that it tends to make those who want to me a mage "on the side" (such as a battlemage) too focused in magic. Specifically, it seems like you have to take these two skills in tandem in order to be a mage of any effectiveness.Just voicing some minor concerns I have. 
[/quote]

[b]Diplomacy:[/b]

That is one of the biggest concerns with diplomacy and largely something on my part the effects things. There will be minor bonuses, however, for the sake of realism... Which is really something Renalta does try to keep to in regards of people and such... It makes sense for GM calls on interaction. It makes no sense to have a massive bonus indiscriminately regardless of what you say or do and punish those who actually think out what they are saying and play their cards right simply because they failed to take points. And, at the end of the day... I'll be honest, diplomacy has the least amount of dice rolls. If we were to have massive amounts involved, chances are you are all going to experience severe levels of bipolar, schizophrenic behaviors from NPCs. *shakes my head* If you are wanting to play a charming character who -knows what to say- you should probably have the rough idea of how to be charming. IRL skills are negligible in the fact that I'm sure [i]everyone[/i] knows someone in some manner who just radiates charisma and can emulate in their writings. That's what writers do, you know. Draw from inspiration.

[b]Mages:[/b]

In Legend of Renalta, being an actual mage requires dedicated training and training. The same goes for those under the heavy (warrior) and light (rogue) classes. If you cross-class, you are not going to be as effective as those more dedicated to the field. [b]Especially starting out where all you have is the basics and are [i]just starting out[/i][/b]. If you have a character concept you have in mind, start with the basic outline. Then build towards it and branch out. Just because you are not the biggest and strongest at the beginning does not mean you are limited by any means. This goes for all classes. 

If you want a solid example of a cross-class character starting out... Taigyn of the Templars. He was an party defender character with some anti-magic capabilities. This was a character in LoR1. When he entered the game, he was only able to create small orbs of light as an ability. It took a massive power-boosting AoE from an ancient spirit for him to be able to [i]temporarily blind people with his talents[/i]. Given advanced training and exploration through story and time, he's actually a very strong character now.

Cross-classing in general implies you are less capable in both fields at the expense of being more rounded in skills. If you spread yourself too thin at the start... Of course you are not going to have much strength in any one field. If you somehow manage to live through that... Congratulations, you can begin to grow stronger and more capable. This all ties back to the most basic of concepts. [b]Jack-of-all-Trades, Master of None.[/b]