OSINT-6 CHANGELOG 251029

The strongest argument for using SRD 5.2.1 wasn't popularity by itself. A familiar chassis is useful when its parts continue to solve the new game's problems. Several parts did.

The six abilities provide a broad vocabulary for physical capability, reasoning, awareness, and influence. Proficiency distinguishes trained agents from untrained people without requiring a separate percentage scale for every task. Difficulty Classes let the Game Master express uncertainty through one numerical range. Advantage and disadvantage absorb many situational factors without producing long modifier stacks.

The action structure also transferred well. Actions, movement, reactions, attacks, damage, and conditions remain useful when an operation turns immediate and contested. Players can move from surveillance or negotiation into a pursuit or armed confrontation without changing resolution engines. A single core procedure keeps the game coherent across mission phases.

Compatibility also gave us a useful editorial test. When an established rule worked, we could retain and restate it. When it worked only after translation, we could convert its terminology and examples. When its assumptions fought the genre, we could replace or omit it. The SRD became a baseline for comparison instead of a requirement to preserve every subsystem.

This approach shortened some explanations, but it didn't make the design automatic. A modern skill list still needed to separate ability, profession, skill, and equipment qualification. Firearms needed traits and profiles. Vehicles, communications, surveillance, research, sources, operational security, and mission planning required procedures the fantasy rules didn't supply.

The chassis gave OSINT-6 a common mechanical language. Its value came from selective reuse. A familiar rule stayed only when it supported the intended decision at the table.