[quote=@Gareth] @Prince of Seraphs, Thank you. I think I have changed my signature for the better. [/quote] You also want to put my name in square brackets for a functional mention, again the OCD. Hey [@Lugubrious] don't you think the class system is a little constricting? I mean yes I know it's fire emblem and as a tactical game it makes perfect sense that these classes are limited to these skills and abilities and you have to formulate your plans around who can do what. However in a transition to a realistic scenario I think the limits the classes impose are sort of ridiculous. Like realistically a medieval thief is going to want a small and less hefty weapon than a sword that way when breaking and entering it's not cumbersome but he can still defend himself if discovered. A troubadour is a traveling minstrel who goes from town to town singing songs and ballads and telling stories for whatever money the townsfolk are willing to give him or her. As a constant traveler it would be downright foolish not to know how to wield some sort of weapon in case of ambush by bandits or thieves. These are just a few examples, as a bonus the actual weapons available are also rather limited. While in a tactical game this was perfectly normal and sensible it seems a little ridiculous for a real life scenario. We are more or less limited to: [list] [*] Swords [*] Axes [*] Lances [*] Bows [*] Tomes [*] Staves [*] Stones [/list] We could have things like quarter staffs, daggers, halberds, maces, flails, morning stars, crossbows, warhammers, scythes, and sickles. That sort of thing. I'm not saying that a character should be able to use every weapon but classes such as say mercenary would have to know how to use a lot more than just a sword if they wanted to be effective at their job and live long enough to get paid. Likewise knights would know more than just the lance or the sword and bowman generally would have a sword or some close range weapon on hand in case the enemy got close enough that the bow was no longer effective.