@Stabbey I don't want to derail the topic, but I believe the logic is consistent. Ideally I want to work within the boundaries of the game and take every advantage I can from the set of rules presented. Arbitrarily limiting ourselves is a practice we already use, but it gets a little fuzzy at times and is ultimately subjective and starts to break the immersion of the system.
For example if you are referring to selling crafted arrows for profit being abuse, then is selling any crafted item an abuse if we find that it sells for more than the sum of its parts? Rather than say "well just don't do that" wouldn't it be better if the devs looked at some resold items that were perhaps returning too high of margins and toned them down a bit?
I want to push the boundaries of any system. If we find something that gives too much of an advantage we tend to remove it from our strategy as it lowers the fun. After a while if there are too many big advantage strats then what we really have is a cumbersome list of rules to follow.
The original suggestions were for increasing some of the difficulty in tactician or creating a difficulty above tactician for those of us that want a more difficult experience without having to placing too many artificial limitations.
If it can improve the game for a lot of us without taking anything from other difficulties and without creating too much work for the devs then I don't really see any down side.
