David Dunham wrote:
>
> Normally there's no mechanical impact of categorizing (and in any
> long-running game I'll just alphabetize so I can find stuff). You'll
> note that the ex-counterinsurgent has an entirely different scheme.
> Furthermore, it's really hard to assign a broad ability into one
> category. Is Warrior "Mind" (oriental-style training) or "Matter" (Sun
> Country shield push)?
>
You pick one. If it is important to the feel of your game, there is
clearly no reason NOT to do it. As you say, there is no mechanical
reason to do it unless as a default, and broad stats are likely to
overlap many.
So if it is the kind of thing that matters, include it. If it doesn't,
then don't.
>
> Better would to to decide on the spot. If there is really a bonus,
> then apply it depending on how the player describes things. "I circle
> cautiously, hoping my opponent reveals a flaw in his style" is
> different from "I dart in, raining blows left and right with lightning
> speed."
>
I am a huge fan of applying bonuses by description. I mean, it is the
only way to introduce tactics into the otherwise crushingly flat
Extended Contests. (I'm still trying to figure out a way to do this in a
more standardized way, but haven't had much chance to work on the
project.) So absolutely, you can just do it by bonuses from
description. But as always, the genre and feel of the game will help
dictate how you want to do that.
LC