Quote Originally Posted by Psyren View Post
Nobody is advocating for "no difference." Of course different species playing the same class should have differences. And I'd argue that nobody wants there to be "bad choices" either. Some choices being better or worse than others, comparatively, is reasonable - but not being clearly or objectively "bad," there's still a baseline level of effectiveness that every species should be able to hit.

For example, picking Eladrin for your Warlock arguably gives it more interesting tactical options than picking Orc. But the Orc (a) isn't a bad choice for Warlock, and (b) gets a couple of interesting tactics of its own, especially for a Hexblade or Celestial.
Choices that are poorer than other choices are bad choices, relatively. The absolute values do not matter, this is still the case. As mentioned up above, these choices may be entirely build dependent, with a race/species and class combination being good for one type of build and bad for another type of build. I think many players want choices to matter, and many players who just want to build whatever combination they want without being penalised. This is why there are two divisions.

The worst case scenario in my opinion is to still have differences that make certain races/species and class non-optimal, but for these differences to be minor - it doesn't really work for either camp. Its not a compromise, its the worst of both. People are still penalised, while the choice feels very unsatisfying and does not encourage figuring out how to best work with the result. Its an irritant rather than a useful feature.