Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 9332842" data-attributes="member: 6801228">No it isn't. If they did have those proficiencies, then they could have swapped for the tool profs like the elves and the dwarves.You hating it doesn't make it a bad idea. You declaring there is some fundamental difference between swapping a weapon for a tool, instead of a skill for a skill or a tool for tool doesn't make it so. And who cares if it is vital? Obviously it isn't vital to the functioning of the game, if it was, the game would be dead. That, again, doesn't make it a bad idea. So, other than "I hate it and don't think it makes sense"... do you have any reasons, like any sort of ways it has done a single bit of harm to the game?Sure, you've seen them, I haven't. That doesn't make me blind. I can run the numbers on character creation as easily as you can. And I'm not impressed. The absolute best it does is allow a half-feat at level 4 to achieve an 18. That isn't exactly staggering.I never said that the human has all the features of a baseline dwarf. I said they achieved the same 18 strength with heavy armor mastery that you were claiming was so impactful, without wasting any of their features.No it isn't. They are on two different lines of text. Just because you link them, because taken seperately one or the other is useless for the character, doesn't mean they are in actuality a single feature.And I have seen a lot of people ask to swap things out. People like tweaking and customizing. Kind of shocking you've never once seen someone ask for that.And I agree the goblin situation is a problem, and offered a solution. And while perhaps the designers did have a design intent here... I think the changes came far more with the realization of how they were stuck in old ways of doing things. 10 years of design and they started making improvements incrementally, finding how to better leverage the things people want to see.</blockquote>

Verification