Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="stevelabny" data-source="post: 6075747" data-attributes="member: 9298">Are you purposely trying to obfuscate your points with 50-cent words or do you really speak this way all the time? Can we get some elucidation up in here? This isn't meta-gaming. This is role-playing. Which is the first part of role-playing game. Why is it that people always seem to forget one part or the other.  But yeah.  This is what we've determined the problem is. I don't consider this to be metagaming,  you don't consider pre-play optimization choices to be metagaming. We disagree. Say what now?  Wizards have HIGH INTELLIGENCE.  I would agree that usually involves technical study - as opposed to sorcerer. But ingenuity? reason? guile?  NONE OF THOSE THINGS go hand in hand with high intelligence.   People can be clever with being intelligent and intelligent without being clever.  That's a book smarts vs street smarts kinda thing.   Guile even more so.  And reason? Why can't the wizard be religious or emotional instead of a vulcan?  Foolish is the opposite of wise, which is a different stat.  Why do you think wizards wouldn't be impetuous? Do you think that only falls on the rogue? An impetuous wizard and a clever patient rogue sounds like a fun team.   You're nerfing human personality far more than I could ever nerf in-game abilities. Not always. But Indy is one of the major archetypes that characters are usually built with bits of.</blockquote>