Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 9025163" data-attributes="member: 6790260">Then why doesn't it limit humans too?Then what you will actually see is almost no one ever playing that. Which was the whole point.And, as noted in my post above, it is completely possible to support everyone being Basically Competent at every class, while still preserving the physiological distinctiveness of dwarves vs elves vs whatever. You just have to be willing to allow that there are solutions other than the facile one.Except that that is simply not true--the individual variation within populations of sapient beings would almost surely be greater than the difference between their central tendencies. The bell curves almost surely will overlap. And if they do overlap, then there's no validity to the claim that physiology completely and totally determines what a species is capable of doing. It can have influence, yes--but not be ironclad destiny.Because there are other solutions besides the facile one. Your dichotomy is false: We can avoid nerfing anything, by instead forcing players to choose between benefits. Opportunity cost is, as I've argued to you previously, a powerful design tool and an excellent way to encourage or discourage particular player behaviors. A tool that avoids both the faults of, and dislike for, things like banning and punishing.13th Age has some genuinely brilliant design. The escalation die, the components of the Monk and Druid classes (well beyond what I mentioned above), and the RAB choice vs class ability bonus choice as mentioned above. Even if one never plays it, I think there's a good argument to be made that GMs should look over it for mechanics to borrow.</blockquote>

Verification