Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Li Shenron" data-source="post: 934101" data-attributes="member: 1465">I agree with you. I never had problems with SF in one school, not even with GSF if I have to be honest. DCs break up the sky with PrCl abilities especially when you allow players to take more PrCl. To change a core rule in order to fix a problematic optional rule would be very funny if it wasn't sad instead.If Collins really said that they were seriously concerned with the power of GSF, he's not being very serious. Why did they write GSF in the first place if there was no need? To make an accessory book more attractive for powergamers? <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f644.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":rolleyes:" title="Roll eyes    :rolleyes:"  data-smilie="11"data-shortname=":rolleyes:" /> Why not changing GSF with an errata? Seems like they are mostly concerned about not changing pulished products which they can't re-published in revised version. But let's remember that 3e core was much more playtested than the accessory books, and it's them which have proven the most material to be imperfect, but unfortunately they are too expensive to revise.</blockquote>