D&D 5E Great Weapon Mastery - once more into the breach! (with math)

[FrogReaver]

[MENTION=6812267]Ganymede81[/MENTION]

In case you forgot what you said...

I have no clue why you guys are working from a chart of values when you can simply solve the system algebraically with a ratio.

That ratio is this: D/H = 30, where D is the average expected damage-per-hit before feat/stat bumps, and H is the the decimal chance to hit before feat/stat bumps. If the quotient is less than 30, GWM is better. If the quotient is greater than 30, +2 Str is better.

Y'all make things so complicated.

 

[Ganymede81]

That was the creepiest interaction I've ever had on this forum.

 

[FrogReaver]

Anyone want to explain why he suggested that was a creepy interaction. Because I am clueless...

 

[Helldritch]

Anyone want to explain why he suggested that was a creepy interaction. Because I am clueless...

Well... you shouldn't.

1) You want so much to be "right" that you ignore what the other is saying and you nitpick on one point. You don't take the post as whole, but you just pick the one thing that must not be totaly right in your point of view and imply that the rest of the post is wrong. Nothing can be further from the truth. Sometimes, not everything is black and white. Shades of grey are there. One part of one of the equation/post might be wrong yet the rest perfectly valid. Sometimes a post might be totaly wrong and yet, from the point of view of the poster, it can be totaly right for the poster.

2) Even with a conceded point you keep bringing it up. That can be creepy and unsettling for some people at times. Showing a mistake is great for the both of you. Hammering it is not...

3) You don't even want to put yourself in the shoes of the person you are "discussing" with. Sometimes adopting the other's point of view can help you relate to what he is saying or debating thus helping both to reach a common understanding. It is often the best way to relate to each others in good hearted nature. Being wrong does not mean inept, bad or stupid.

I am sure you are a very good person. It's just that sometimes, you don't seem to know when to stop. Sometimes, the best way to convince someone is letting the dust settle down a bit...

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Well... you shouldn't.

1) You want so much to be "right" that you ignore what the other is saying and you nitpick on one point. You don't take the post as whole, but you just pick the one thing that must not be totaly right in your point of view and imply that the rest of the post is wrong. Nothing can be further from the truth. Sometimes, not everything is black and white. Shades of grey are there. One part of one of the equation/post might be wrong yet the rest perfectly valid. Sometimes a post might be totaly wrong and yet, from the point of view of the poster, it can be totaly right for the poster.

2) Even with a conceded point you keep bringing it up. That can be creepy and unsettling for some people at times. Showing a mistake is great for the both of you. Hammering it is not...

3) You don't even want to put yourself in the shoes of the person you are "discussing" with. Sometimes adopting the other's point of view can help you relate to what he is saying or debating thus helping both to reach a common understanding. It is often the best way to relate to each others in good hearted nature. Being wrong does not mean inept, bad or stupid.

I am sure you are a very good person. It's just that sometimes, you don't seem to know when to stop. Sometimes, the best way to convince someone is letting the dust settle down a bit...

I'm kind of curious too. In what way do points #1-#3 add up to "creepy" as opposed to "aggravating" or "idiot"? "Creepy" has connotations of causing fear or distress. When someone is being a nitwit, that's not creepy. You just killfile/Ignore them. When someone is being a nitwit and you killfile them and they show up at your actual house late at night to continue the discussion... that's kind of creepy.

I can't see FrogReaver's posts so I don't know whether he did something actually creepy or not, but I'm sort of curious.

 

[Helldritch]

You can't?
Well, just the tone of how it is written. The way the sentences are made. The actual insistence of how he's trying to force feed his idea.
It may just be style.
But when someone concede you a point, it is not necessary to continue to hammer it just to be sure that the person got it.
Again I am sure he is a nice chap. He is just overdoing it a bit.

Edit: And if someone just come at your home to continue a discussion when they've been ignored... it's not creepy, it's dangerous. Creepy is often associated with fear, but it can also mean discomfort, strangness, etc...

 

[FrogReaver]

@Helldritch

Thanks for being the only 1 to answer. Even if everything you said about me was spot on and 100% true I still don't see how that equates to creepy. So I guess I'll never understand. That's okay I guess. Thank you for trying to explain nonetheless.

With that said I'm not going to hash out with you the places I disagree with your analysis on this. Instead I just want to ask for one thing. Don't forget to put yourself in my shoes when we are discussing things or you are watching me discuss something with others. You gave solid advice there and in my experience it applies to virtually everyone equally.

 

[Ovinomancer]

You can't?
Well, just the tone of how it is written. The way the sentences are made. The actual insistence of how he's trying to force feed his idea.
It may just be style.
But when someone concede you a point, it is not necessary to continue to hammer it just to be sure that the person got it.
Again I am sure he is a nice chap. He is just overdoing it a bit.

Edit: And if someone just come at your home to continue a discussion when they've been ignored... it's not creepy, it's dangerous. Creepy is often associated with fear, but it can also mean discomfort, strangness, etc...

Are we now comparing a post on a message board, even a forceful one, with tracking people down in their homes and making them talk to you?

This is a thing that people actually think?

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Are we now comparing a post on a message board, even a forceful one, with tracking people down in their homes and making them talk to you?

This is a thing that people actually think?

Contrasting, not comparing. The idea is that nothing done on a message board can possibly be "creepy"; at best it can be infuriating.

Helldritch is using a different definition of "creepy" to mean "irritating" and "dangerous" to mean "creepy", but he is likewise not painting messages on a message board as dangerous.

In both cases, no one is using the same word to refer to both message board behavior and real life stalking.

 

[Ovinomancer]

Contrasting, not comparing. The idea is that nothing done on a message board can possibly be "creepy"; at best it can be infuriating.

Helldritch is using a different definition of "creepy" to mean "irritating" and "dangerous" to mean "creepy", but he is likewise not painting messages on a message board as dangerous.

In both cases, no one is using the same word to refer to both message board behavior and real life stalking.

Ah, thanks, Helldritch.