Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="two" data-source="post: 1815419" data-attributes="member: 9002">I think it's silly.&nbsp; A race that is:&nbsp; +2 Con, -1 Dex, -1 Charisma (and some other non-stat disadvantage or limitation) works just fine.&nbsp; What's the big deal?&nbsp; Sometimes the dexterity &quot;hit&quot; hurts, sometimes it does not immediately. Ditto charisma.&nbsp; Big deal.&nbsp; Taken as a group, this race will be slightly less dexterous than humans, and less charismatic.&nbsp; Fine, done.So what if a PC with a dex=13 takes a -1 on dex and isn't penalizied at level 1 for it?&nbsp; dex=12=13=+1 bonus.&nbsp; Big deal.&nbsp; Sometimes you get a 13 in dexterity before applying the penality and it doesn't hurt, sometimes you get a 12 and it does after applying the penalty.&nbsp; Why does it always have to be one or the other?&nbsp; It's still a penalty, anyway:&nbsp; 13 to 12.&nbsp; When you hit level 4, if you wanted to bump up your dex, after all, you are screwed, while a human could get it to 14 right away at level 4 (with the inherent bonus).I play with lots of races wth +1/-1 penalties.&nbsp; It makes customizing races a lot easier, and helps balance those marginally too-powerful or too-weak races (give Dwarves a -1 to dex, give Half-Orcs a +1 to con).If you are so obsessed with stopping players from &quot;hiding&quot; strengths and weaknesses (if they can) to such a degree that you ban the natural idea of uses +/- 1 bonuses and penalties for racial flavor, you are the one missing out.&nbsp; In my humble.I mean come on.&nbsp; Nobody minds when the wizard &quot;hides&quot; his 8 in strength, or the half-orc wanders around with a charisma=6=Int.&nbsp; A class-based game where some stats are completly unecessary for various classes is a far more serious affront to the &quot;hide weakness&quot; &quot;problem&quot; -- in quotes because it's not really a problem.&nbsp; It's a bee that buzzes in various people's bonnet.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="two, post: 1815419, member: 9002"] I think it's silly. A race that is: +2 Con, -1 Dex, -1 Charisma (and some other non-stat disadvantage or limitation) works just fine. What's the big deal? Sometimes the dexterity "hit" hurts, sometimes it does not immediately. Ditto charisma. Big deal. Taken as a group, this race will be slightly less dexterous than humans, and less charismatic. Fine, done. So what if a PC with a dex=13 takes a -1 on dex and isn't penalizied at level 1 for it? dex=12=13=+1 bonus. Big deal. Sometimes you get a 13 in dexterity before applying the penality and it doesn't hurt, sometimes you get a 12 and it does after applying the penalty. Why does it always have to be one or the other? It's still a penalty, anyway: 13 to 12. When you hit level 4, if you wanted to bump up your dex, after all, you are screwed, while a human could get it to 14 right away at level 4 (with the inherent bonus). I play with lots of races wth +1/-1 penalties. It makes customizing races a lot easier, and helps balance those marginally too-powerful or too-weak races (give Dwarves a -1 to dex, give Half-Orcs a +1 to con). If you are so obsessed with stopping players from "hiding" strengths and weaknesses (if they can) to such a degree that you ban the natural idea of uses +/- 1 bonuses and penalties for racial flavor, you are the one missing out. In my humble. I mean come on. Nobody minds when the wizard "hides" his 8 in strength, or the half-orc wanders around with a charisma=6=Int. A class-based game where some stats are completly unecessary for various classes is a far more serious affront to the "hide weakness" "problem" -- in quotes because it's not really a problem. It's a bee that buzzes in various people's bonnet. [/QUOTE]

Verification