Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
Playing the Game
Play by Post
Living Worlds
Living Pathfinder [closed]
Proposal: Streamlined traits
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Systole" data-source="post: 5849902" data-attributes="member: 93930"><p>I can't fault you for liking the clunkiness, although it's not a sentiment I share. However, I don't think that it's the best way to keep people from thinking about the mechanical benefits of traits. Rather, I believe the best way to open the field for RP is <u>balance</u>. If choosing between option A and option B does not significantly alter my character's effectiveness, then I can choose whatever fits RP-wise without worrying that my character is going to suck. But if option A is vastly better than option B, then I owe it to my fellow players to choose option A, or else I feel like I'm dragging the party down. </p><p> </p><p>Which is why I object so strongly to Capable: Perception. Capable: Perception is hugely, insanely advantageous for classes without Perception, to the point where it practically becomes a trait tax. If that trait were available, and I built a wizard without it, I would feel <u>guilty</u>. I don't want my choices to be locked in like that.</p><p> </p><p>For what it's worth, if given the choice between the old system and this proposed system with Capable: Perception included, I would choose the old system in a heartbeat. I'm not going to stop playing LPF if it's approved or anything, but I do believe that Capable: Perception is just that broken.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Systole, post: 5849902, member: 93930"] I can't fault you for liking the clunkiness, although it's not a sentiment I share. However, I don't think that it's the best way to keep people from thinking about the mechanical benefits of traits. Rather, I believe the best way to open the field for RP is [U]balance[/U]. If choosing between option A and option B does not significantly alter my character's effectiveness, then I can choose whatever fits RP-wise without worrying that my character is going to suck. But if option A is vastly better than option B, then I owe it to my fellow players to choose option A, or else I feel like I'm dragging the party down. Which is why I object so strongly to Capable: Perception. Capable: Perception is hugely, insanely advantageous for classes without Perception, to the point where it practically becomes a trait tax. If that trait were available, and I built a wizard without it, I would feel [U]guilty[/U]. I don't want my choices to be locked in like that. For what it's worth, if given the choice between the old system and this proposed system with Capable: Perception included, I would choose the old system in a heartbeat. I'm not going to stop playing LPF if it's approved or anything, but I do believe that Capable: Perception is just that broken. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
Playing the Game
Play by Post
Living Worlds
Living Pathfinder [closed]
Proposal: Streamlined traits
Top