Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="GreyICE" data-source="post: 6029829" data-attributes="member: 6684526">Meh, I don't think that wall of text was meant to be readable or read, and my eyes glazed over.  For anyone else who is following this ridiculous debate, if we reframe it a little the problem becomes obvious.  Lets shift Pillars.Player APlayer A is playing a fighter.  He made him a dwarf for the bonuses.  During exploration and puzzle moments he sits around saying nothing.  During social moments he says "I'm in the corner drinking beer."  The only thing he does is hit things with his axe.   If pressed, he just grunts "I was born for fightin, don't much care who."Player BPlayer B is playing a fighter.  His fighter is the apprentice of a former blacksmith, whose master was taken away by the city guard for failure to pay taxes (even though it turns out the taxes were paid).  The reason the guard thought the taxes were unpaid was that a corrupt official was embezzling money from the taxes, and falsified records to cover himself.  The apprentice, left with no guild masters mark and no way to obtain one, had no way to support his family.  He picked up the sword he was working on and the armor he had in the shop, and joined a mercenary company, where he faithfully sent home money to his wife and child every month.  This lasted until the siege of Kartus, where the mercenary company he was serving with got stabbed in the back.  They had a deal with a "rival" mercenary company where they both would accept commissions and fight to stalemates with a minimum of casualties.  People were hurt, and sometimes even killed, but it lacked the casualty rate of all-out combat, so they generally could make a healthy profit without too much risk.  Except that their "rival" company sold them out, and banded together with two more companies to slaughter the poor hapliss mercs.Our hero barely managed to survive...See, most people would be talking about Player A and how he could be more like Player B.  He has history, background, story, interesting hooks for other PCs and for the DM, good stuff.  All around, most DMs would say that they'd much rather have Player B than Player A.  [MENTION=6668292]JamesonCourage[/MENTION] would suggest that the only way the system could be fair would be by giving Player A more combat capability and more damage than player B.  5/1/1 rather than 3/3/3, after all!Switch pillars, and the exact nature of the problem becomes apparent.  You are rewarding problem players.  That inevitably leads to a spiral where problem players become the dominant players, because players who are good (like player B) leave for systems that reward them rather than punish them, and people who are fence sitting see player A and decide to emulate them.  Don't reward problem players.  Don't pat the MinMaxers on the back and tell them they've done good.  If you want to play an unbalanced character, the system should reward you for it in no way whatsoever.  P.S.  If Jameson's Courage wants, I will personally homebrew him a sage class for Next.  It will be exactly like the wizard class, except specifically prohibited from being in any way useful in combat.  Does that work?</blockquote>

Verification