Quote Originally Posted by TeeEl View Post
The problem is that heavy armor tends to be a questionable improvement over light armor. My options are either making armor proficiency trivially easy to get, or making armor proficiency more useful. I opted for the latter because it leads to increased character diversity.
I'm not arguing that it's a bad idea, I think it's a good idea. I'm just saying that it's not part of the same system.

Quote Originally Posted by TeeEl View Post
Flaws, though, fit right into the feat system, so I'm not sure how they pose a problem. The simple route, of course, would be to say no flaws; they're an optional rule to begin with, after all. But I definitely think default flaws are probably not a good idea. The penalties are situational and pretty small, making them almost a no-brainer in standard 3.5e even if the benefits are small too. But many feats are more powerful here to make them comparable to all the nice class features that you can also buy as feats, so now the cost:reward ratio is even more favorable.
Again, I think it is a good fix but it's a different variant. In Unearthed Arcana the Flaw variant isn't presented along with the Generic Classes variant.

Quote Originally Posted by TeeEl View Post
Of course, there's also less demand for feats. Flaws are often tolerated even by balance-conscious DMs because default 3.5e leaves just about everyone terribly starved for feats, whereas most non-casters end up with a glut of feats here. My notes include a few rough drafts of base classes statted out under this system, and the number of feat choices left open for non-casters is pretty crazy.
Indeed, personally, in the past I've given out bonus feats instead of using the flaw system. In this variant, there are plenty of feats to go around so it isn't as big of an issue.

Quote Originally Posted by TeeEl View Post
"Converting" the base classes (as examples, mind you, not actual codified classes) may be a good plan, actually. I think players might find the system a lot less daunting if instead of being told "Here's a list of feats, build a ranger-type character from scratch" they were told "Here's a modified level progression for a Ranger class, and oh feel free to swap out any class abilities you don't want."

(Currently, there is no concept of class skills or skills known; all skills are equal. I'm open to a change here, but most likely any system for handling restricted skills would be based on Expert tiers, and I'm actually not positive I want to keep the three-path system. But since you're going to be trying it I'm going to wait and see how people take the system as it is before I go in and start ripping things out, though.)
Alright, so for now at least all skills are class skills.