Modern RPG is trending toward simplification and rule lite system. For many Classic BT players it may not matter much, but if CGL want to capture a wider RPG market, even the point buy option is still too clunky by modern standard. D&D, Pathfinder, Shadowrun all follows the mainstream trend.
As an example...
I like detailed characters. I like having traits and skills that define what a character is, and what he knows or is capable of.
But I also dislike overlapping skills, or minor differences....
Negotiation being wordplay, intimidation being physical is a big difference, but would we need separate skills for Oration and Acting?
By and large, once I know what the character can do, I want rules that are simple.
I don't need to account for every possible modifier in an RPG game the way I need in a board game. In the latter, I need to account for every tree, every hex, every piece of terrain and movement, ECM and so on because TT tactics and fairness dictate that. If I move into a treed hex I should get the benefits of doing so. But in an RPG, I don't need the exact modifier...I just need to know if the shot is easy, difficult or near impossible. Then I need one role to decide if the actions succeeds
As an example - look at the combining Actions example in the ATOW companion. To land a ship it lists the use of six skills. Six skills for one action. That is over complicating for no benefit - I should just need to roll once for that one action, and if there is a failure, then the margin of failure should help determine the seriousness of failure.
One roll - not six. That CGL saw the need to include this as an example is, to my mind, crazy. It should, need one - OK, two for the Acting aspect but no more.
