Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Voadam" data-source="post: 9797929" data-attributes="member: 2209">I think it is more about balance of options versus deliberately making certain specific concepts work well or poorly for specific archetypes.Should there be specific ones that synergize well mechanically (3e half orc barbarian with bonus strength) and ones that are mechanically detrimented (3e half orc sorcerer with a charisma penalty)?I am more in favor of the game being designed for all PCs to be designed to be balanced.24 background ASIs are designed to synergize mechanically with a bunch of classes but not others. So if you like the roleplay/story concept of a background and choose it, it may or may not add a mechanical power bonus to your class based attacks. So some combos have trade offs and some have none.I dislike having some PC roleplay story choices making some characters better than others by design.If it had to be tied to something I would prefer it to be tied to your class rather than your background, for both mechanical and story reasons. Mechanically it means it would always be put to synergize with the class instead f sometimes doing so and sometimes not, which will mean more mechanical balance. Story wise it would mean that mechanically powerful sorcerers come from any background and not just things like performer type backgrounds that are associated with charisma.</blockquote>