Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Cronocke" data-source="post: 6344323" data-attributes="member: 63379">Yeah, I'm pretty much in favor of equality - if one choice is inherently worthless, and another is highly useful and versatile, why does the first even exist?That's on the extreme end of the equation, but my point still stands, why should there be inherently "better" and "worse" choices?I'm fine with each character specializing in different things, and I'm fine with the generalist being worse than the specialist at their one thing, but better at other things. It's when you can be a generalist who outperforms - or obsoletes - specialists that I balk.Sure. But those other things besides single combat should be equally useful, and used just as often, or else it's still a worse choice.I prefer immediate tradeoffs to long-term ones, as when you trade early power for late power, the people who didn't do that lag behind as a direct result.But why is "paper knife" even an option in this example? This is the thing that I don't understand - it's fine if you want things to be inherently Cool, but why not make all the things Cool? Why not pair the bazooka with the Dagger of Sudden Teleportation or the Infinitely Extending Laser Sword or something? You can have things be nice and flavorful without them having to be mechanically bad.</blockquote>