Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Skyscraper" data-source="post: 5810010" data-attributes="member: 48518">I'm not against restrictions, on the contrary, but as long as they're not too arbitrary or make some sense to me. To me, this means that restrictions should be few.Agreed.The solution you propose is kind of weird, no? You need to turn someone into a... ? You know what, I vastly prefer wizards capable of healing to what you propose, although I'm against wizards capable of healing <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />I don't like this stereotype to become structurally forced into the game. This irks me. This is why I always liked rolling ability scores. Because you end up with enduring or strong wizards. I work with a programmer, he's strong, plays sports, and he tackles like a pro. Life is like that. Some people follow intellectual paths, but still have superior physical attributes. To me, the restriction you propose to wizards clearly falls into the arbitrary category. I think that many people with great physical strength might orient themselves towards a career where physical strength is rewarded, as opposed to one where intellectual prowess is rewarded, but you'll still have weak(er) fighters and (more) intelligent wizards.Before a desginer hardwires a restriction into the game, I would hope that he would ask himself: why is it impossible for X to be Y? And could this be a preference that some gamers can houserule into their game, instead of it being a core rule?</blockquote>

Verification