I agree with the reply, but it's still odd. The list is matter disruption, and I can't see why the spell should be limited to inorganic matter just because no one wants it to be used on *living* matter. It is an evil Essence list, I have trouble finding a reason why stone and metal would be OK but wood would not. It would be OK if there was a "organic matter disruption" spell somewhere else, but there isn't.

I am squarely under the impression that the authors wanted to avoid the use of such spells on living matter (because it would essentially be a 'RR or die' kind of spell, and we all know that such spells are only found in the Black Channels list :-p). But excluding wood (what about petrified wood ?), cotton and all kinds of cloth, alcohol and basically all kinds of carbon compounds (coal, sugar, oil...), just because the spell is poorly worded seems being overly pedantic to me - having the spell work on water (inorganic) but not on oil, on air (mostly inorganic) but not on methane, ammonia, carbon dioxide and others, or on ruby but not on diamond, makes absolutely no sense to me.

I would house rule it into "inanimate" matter. Or "unliving" if you want to be even less restrictive (the difference being "inanimate" doesn't work on a stone golem or an undead, but "unliving" does).

Still, it's a F spell, not a U spell. Matter gets a RR. Wood, if affected, might have a lower level than iron

I built a Shadowrun character once who was a bit of a con man, and a (poor) mage specializing in surveillance and evasion. He wasn't a pacifist but simply a cowardly character with zero combat skills and an attitude: If the guns come out, the mission has already failed. If I remember correctly he would handle guns to threaten people and show off; but in any case he never actually pulled the trigger.

I think the key point about such non-combat characters is to know when to run away, and make sure the rest of the party is fully aware that yes, he absolutely will run and hide in a shootout.

As for how XP are gained, I think the US has a different approach from Europe. In the US, D&D evolved from wargaming roots and always relied on combat as an important gameplay factor. Which is why many games have very elaborate combat rules that can cross over into wargaming or even boardgame territory. The European approach feels more story-driven and character based, with combat as an adjunct instead of a core component. But the European RPG industry was of course still heavily influenced by the US approach.

The example I gave was from the Talisman Adventures RPG from Pegasus Spiele. Yes, a bigger company with a bigger budget. But we have excellent software these days, why can't an individual working from home lay out a good-looking book? Is is just that the time involved to do each page, for example with text often wrapped around art, was not available to the ICE team? Is it that folk with the skills charge an arm and a leg?

You say this like everyone with a digital camera should be able to become a professional photographer. They can't. You need to dedicate time to it. ICE can't do that. It's not their actual job, it's essentially a side hobby.  You're talking about someone who doesn't publish as their full time job using a program that they may not own.

I'll just add that RMSS is an example of good layout (now dated, but the style was fine at the time) with low-budget art.

But you're comparing a company with full time employees with a better budget. Just like I suspect the page you used as an example was even bigger company with an even bigger budget.

It's not (only) about paying more for art.
Look at the layout here.
https://imgur.com/a/14hOu4p
This is a random page, literally the first page I flipped to from the last pdf I had open.
See how the shape of the art has been incorporated into the column layout of the page? See how background textures have been used? See how there is a shadow from the dwarf which spills over into the page? This all gives it life and visual appeal. It's basic stuff at this point. Nothing to do with budget.

I don't love the background texture, it looks kind of cool at the expense of readability. Similarly with wrapping text around images. Text is full justified for readability. I don't think that adds anything. It's dynamic in the sense that it disrupts the text layout, but that's also its weakness.