Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf 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 Nest
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*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!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Are proficiency swaps too strong for some races?
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="Levistus's_Leviathan" data-source="post: 8131446" data-attributes="member: 7023887"><p>The problem is that they were fine the way they worked before because it wasn't OP to give them all the features that they had. The armor and weapon proficiency was balanced out by the +2 to Strength, as the people who wanted the armor proficiency probably didn't want the strength bonus, and the people who wanted the amazing bonus to Strength didn't want the armor and weapon proficiency, because they already had that. And that was fine, that was balanced in most circumstances, with most features only being useful to certain people and not to others. </p><p></p><p>That would not be an issue if both of the following things were true:</p><ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">All races were balanced like that. </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">No feature that allowed you to switch these previously useless proficiencies or ability score bonuses existed. </li> </ol><p>Number 1 was never the case, there were very few races balanced the same way, decreasingly as many as the years went on. Those few races that were partially balanced this way were not as skewed to this way of balancing as the Mountain Dwarf was. As you stated, this wasn't really an issue before, the features mostly balanced each other out. However, Number 2 caused this discrepancy to become an issue. </p><p></p><p>Now, any race can switch any of their proficiencies for any other proficiency that WotC says is "equivalent." While this is not an issue for the races that are not balanced in the "ignore half this race's features to get the thing you want"-way that the Mountain Dwarf was balanced around, but it is for the Mountain Dwarf and other races. Basically, it would not be an issue to switch around your proficiencies if the proficiencies were all intended to count for all characters of the same race. </p><p></p><p>The issue is not the new rule as much as it is the disparity between how a Halfling or Shifter is balanced between how a Mountain Dwarf is balanced. The discrepancy is the issue, not the new ruleset.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Levistus's_Leviathan, post: 8131446, member: 7023887"] The problem is that they were fine the way they worked before because it wasn't OP to give them all the features that they had. The armor and weapon proficiency was balanced out by the +2 to Strength, as the people who wanted the armor proficiency probably didn't want the strength bonus, and the people who wanted the amazing bonus to Strength didn't want the armor and weapon proficiency, because they already had that. And that was fine, that was balanced in most circumstances, with most features only being useful to certain people and not to others. That would not be an issue if both of the following things were true: [LIST=1] [*]All races were balanced like that. [*]No feature that allowed you to switch these previously useless proficiencies or ability score bonuses existed. [/LIST] Number 1 was never the case, there were very few races balanced the same way, decreasingly as many as the years went on. Those few races that were partially balanced this way were not as skewed to this way of balancing as the Mountain Dwarf was. As you stated, this wasn't really an issue before, the features mostly balanced each other out. However, Number 2 caused this discrepancy to become an issue. Now, any race can switch any of their proficiencies for any other proficiency that WotC says is "equivalent." While this is not an issue for the races that are not balanced in the "ignore half this race's features to get the thing you want"-way that the Mountain Dwarf was balanced around, but it is for the Mountain Dwarf and other races. Basically, it would not be an issue to switch around your proficiencies if the proficiencies were all intended to count for all characters of the same race. The issue is not the new rule as much as it is the disparity between how a Halfling or Shifter is balanced between how a Mountain Dwarf is balanced. The discrepancy is the issue, not the new ruleset. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Are proficiency swaps too strong for some races?
Top