Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Argyle King" data-source="post: 8118546" data-attributes="member: 58416">I can see the appeal of not using the +2/+1 (or whatever) component of races as a defining trait.I agree with those who say there are other racial aspects to differentiate the races. However (despite what contemporary designers of the game claim*,) where those current bonuses are placed do act as a balancing mechanism -even if it is unintentional or accidental. Allowing all races to choose bonuses is not an inherently bad idea. Though, I would posit that it is a change which prompts a need to rebalance and re-imagine racial abilities. As much of the game was originally built (both crunch and fluff-wise) around a certain set of assumptions (which includes aforementioned bonuses and defining traits of in-game creatures,) I lean toward believing that changing that core assumption also means changes to the core underpinnings of the game system.(*FWIW, I have disagreed with much of the contemporary views on the game long before the new book. For example, flight is deemed to have no impact on a creature's value or ability. I believe that view is wrong from both an in-game perspective and from a broader perspective of strategy and tactics.)I would be perfectly happy to move away from the traditional +2/+1 bonuses as a way of defining races. Though, I believe that doing so means needing to redesign core parts of the game.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Argyle King, post: 8118546, member: 58416"] I can see the appeal of not using the +2/+1 (or whatever) component of races as a defining trait. I agree with those who say there are other racial aspects to differentiate the races. However (despite what contemporary designers of the game claim*,) where those current bonuses are placed do act as a balancing mechanism -even if it is unintentional or accidental. Allowing all races to choose bonuses is not an inherently bad idea. Though, I would posit that it is a change which prompts a need to rebalance and re-imagine racial abilities. As much of the game was originally built (both crunch and fluff-wise) around a certain set of assumptions (which includes aforementioned bonuses and defining traits of in-game creatures,) I lean toward believing that changing that core assumption also means changes to the core underpinnings of the game system. (*FWIW, I have disagreed with much of the contemporary views on the game long before the new book. For example, flight is deemed to have no impact on a creature's value or ability. I believe that view is wrong from both an in-game perspective and from a broader perspective of strategy and tactics.) I would be perfectly happy to move away from the traditional +2/+1 bonuses as a way of defining races. Though, I believe that doing so means needing to redesign core parts of the game. [/QUOTE]

Verification