Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Morrus" data-source="post: 6512105" data-attributes="member: 1">I'm totally fine with that.&nbsp; They're each interested in 40% of their stats.&nbsp; I don't want everybody to feel they all have to increase all of the stats equally.&nbsp; Again, result would be identical characters.&nbsp; It's fine that someone wants to be the clever character, or the strong one, or the accurate one, or the charming one.&nbsp; The problem lies if all characters are interested in the *same* stats. 3s and 4s are all fine. Average in most respects, better at a couple of things is what we're kinda aiming at.&nbsp; The only issue might be the 2s; slightly too many of them.&nbsp; A starting character with an array of:1 x 2mostly x 3 or 42 x 7-8... is about right, I think.&nbsp; So it looks from your stats that a little bolstering at the bottom end is needed, but the rest looks OK.&nbsp; You have more 10s than I'd ideally like to see - for starting characters that should be quite rare, but you have three of them.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Morrus, post: 6512105, member: 1"] I'm totally fine with that. They're each interested in 40% of their stats. I don't want everybody to feel they all have to increase all of the stats equally. Again, result would be identical characters. It's fine that someone wants to be the clever character, or the strong one, or the accurate one, or the charming one. The problem lies if all characters are interested in the *same* stats. 3s and 4s are all fine. Average in most respects, better at a couple of things is what we're kinda aiming at. The only issue might be the 2s; slightly too many of them. A starting character with an array of: 1 x 2 mostly x 3 or 4 2 x 7-8 ... is about right, I think. So it looks from your stats that a little bolstering at the bottom end is needed, but the rest looks OK. You have more 10s than I'd ideally like to see - for starting characters that should be quite rare, but you have three of them. [/QUOTE]

Verification