Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 8063922" data-attributes="member: 18">I mean, that's pretty much textbook whataboutism. Instead of arguing why it's okay, you're just saying "Well why didn't people complain when X did it?!".The trouble with this was that it was a flat cost, and a pretty extreme cost, when in fact different races had different values to different character concepts. So what this did was two things:1) Strongly pushed people to select specific races to do specific things - two races might be costed the same, but one might be drastically more useful as a Decker or Street Sam or whatever. Or worse, a cheaper race might literally be better than a more expensive one. So anyone optimizing picks from a very narrow pool of races for any given role.2) People who aren't optimizing get ripped off even more than usual. So when someone does go "Okay, I do want to be a Troll Rigger!", they're drastically worse off than, say, a Dwarf or Human Rigger, because they have less resources (which can be killer), less skills, etc.I'm not quite sure what the solution is here, but I always found this to be a bit of a problem myself. Some editions it was worse than others.It definitely is. Classes require and involve actual training/aptitude. To be a Fighter you have to exercise and so on, whether you get strong or get agile or both or whatever. To be a Wizard you have to train your mind. I'm not sure how we deal with Charisma but there are a million approaches, like that becoming a Warlock or Paladin actually strengthens your presence by augmenting your soul or whatever. Wisdom can come from being touched by the divine or whatever.There's an actual logical link there. Whereas the idea that everyone from Culture X is "more agile" or "more intelligent" or whatever doesn't hold up to even casual inspection. Background is a bit more viable but the problem there is different - what exactly Background entails/represents is pretty vague. If you could narrow down the concept of Background to be a bit more precise (probably eliminating a few extant backgrounds whilst likely adding others) you'd reach a position where ASIs either did or didn't make sense for Backgrounds.</blockquote>

Verification