What's the rationale behind value-based classes not being able to inherit from base class with instance fields

Question

The final qualifier specced out at https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/jdk-16-ga/src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/doc-files/ValueBased.html#L55 is:

    <li>the class is final, and extends either <code>Object</code> or a hierarchy of
        abstract classes that declare no instance fields or instance initializers
        and whose constructors are empty.</li>

This means that a simple case:

public abstract class Base {
  protected final int f1;
  protected Base(int f1) { this.f1 = f1; }
}

public final class Child extends Base {
  private final int f2;
  public static Child create(int f1, int f2) { return new Child(f1, f2); }
  private Child(int f1, int f2) { super(f1); this.f2 = f2; }
  // equals, hashCode over f1, f2
}

while the "inlined" version would be VBC:

public final class Inlined {
  private final int f1;
  private final int f2;
  public static Inlined create(int f1, int f2) { return new Inlined(f1, f2); }
  private Inlined(int f1, int f2) { this.f1 = f1; this.f2 = f2; }
  // equals, hashCode over f1, f2
}

What was the rationale for making such a harsh restriction to be a VBC, instead of relaxing it towards "all instance fields (including the ones from parent class) need to participate in equals/hashCode etc." ?