Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Bill Zebub" data-source="post: 9724749" data-attributes="member: 7031982">Oh, and maybe that last part of what I just wrote is getting to the essence of what I'm trying to say.  Yes, constraints in the form of rules that force choices are a vital part of games, but there is a difference between constraints that are, for lack of a better term, intended for mechanical balance, and those that are there entirely for aesthetic reasons.So unless one could argue that a combination of the "Lucky" feat with high Strength is somehow unbalancing to the game, I can't see how a constraint on halfling strength is anything other than aesthetic.  And therefore to extrapolate that opposition to that aesthetic is the first step toward rules anarchy is to, in my opinion, make a category error.EDIT: For example, it would be totally acceptable to me to have a general rule that "small" characters have limits on strength and all weapons are considered one category larger (e.g., can't use large weapons, and must use two hands for medium weapons) but in return they have other melee...probably defensive...combat advantages, as long as those disadvantages/advantages model out (to the extent they can be) as roughly equivalent.</blockquote>