NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="MyISPHatesENWorld" data-source="post: 4447167" data-attributes="member: 65684">No.No. I never took issue with anyone pointing out an outstanding issue with any of these backgrounds. I took issue with the specific quote I responded to which broadly attacked the entire article, and gave specific examples of where that quote is in error. If someone finds something that is broken with an optimized character, and suggests fixing it in a way that doesn't penalize non-optimized characters (total bonus caps per level for example), I'll laud it as a great idea. But the current arguments are in effect in favor of requiring choice-limiting optimization. If you can get +3 from background that stacks with your skill training and skill focus and have a CHA of 10, for a scary characters that isn't very likable or diplomatic (or is completely unassuming until he wants you to feel threatened), you'll have the same Intimidate bonus as someone that has a CHA of 16 without the background. If it isn't broken if the +3 is from CHA, it isn't broken if it comes from the background.If a game-braking problem arises when you have a CHA of 18 and are a race that has a Skill Bonus along with Skill Training, Skill Focus and the background (and whatever else), then the solution is a cap on maximum total bonuses, or changes to the skill that breaks at a certain level (or the powers that rely upon it), rather than a limitation on stacking or reduction in the bonus that only serves to limit how you get to a high, but balanced number. i.e. Fix what is broken, not what is working (multiple ways to build an effective character). Just saying X doesn't stack with Y or reducing the bonus to Z is a lazy way out. Note that having multiple ways of getting to the optimal, balanced number is pretty much the antithesis of what many optimizers want - to be able to say they found the "best" way with the highest number. But I'd rather have fun in the game than fun on the boards.</blockquote>

Verification