Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Elder-Basilisk" data-source="post: 833930" data-attributes="member: 3146">Trading two mental abilities for strength isn't the same thing as trading strength for two mental abilities. To use an analogy, I can take an old car and 20,000 dollars to a dealership and get a new car for that. I can't take a new car to a dealership and get an old car and 20,000 dollars for it.Penalties have to be weighed differently than bonusses. Gaining strength is generally more advantageous than gaining other attributes. It doesn't follow, however, that losing strength is more disadvantageous than losing other attributes. (If you were looking for a penalty that would justify unbalanced bonusses, it should be con not strength). Consequently, I think that +2 str has to be balanced by more penalties but -2 strength doesn't justify more bonusses.It's true that some races are better at some class concepts. That doesn't make them broken. On the other hand, if they are significantly better, that does make them broken. The Codex Arcanis for Paradigm concept's campaign setting has the Ardakene race that gives +2 dex, wis, cha for -2 str and con (with favored class cleric to boot). That race is ideally suited for a spell-oriented cleric (truth to be told, it's ideally suited for a lot of classes). I happen to think that it's broken. It's too well suited for that class.</blockquote>