Caliburn101
Explorer
The legal system uses it like I am using it, or it wouldn't be fair AND equitable, meaning two DIFFERENT things, it would be stated as if it were the same thing. For example, rolling is fair, but not equitable, so it wouldn't mean that fair AND equitable standard. That doesn't mean that in the legal system rolling wouldn't be fair.
Hey. We agree on something.
Factually untrue. The dictionary definition of fair says you are wrong.
Sure you can. It can easily be argued that system mastery means that it is not fair that people who have more mastery will do better. It's a failed argument like rolling being unfair, since the system is a fair one, but you can argue that just as easily as you can argue that rolling is unfair.
I'm absolutely certain that someone out there thinks that point buy is unfair for the reason I stated above. There are undoubtedly fewer of them than incorrectly think rolling is unfair, but they exist. You really shouldn't attempt to speak for everyone.
Once again, by literal definition, it doesn't have to be equitable to be fair.
I suggest you review the entire thread and understand what I clearly said at the start and made clear during, that I have been making my point entirely upon the unfairness of the RESULTS of the dice, not the action of rolling them.
If you want to argue that the results of a poor set of dice rolls and a very good one, consequently impacting every associated roll from then on for good or bad is 'fair', then I suggest you revisit that dictionary you are so keen to refer to and also refer to any number of websites that discuss what a fair game is - that being a game where all players have the same probability of a successful outcome not associated with the choices made during the game. Unfortunately, once the different stat bonuses are baked in, the players do not have the same probability of a successful outcome from the dice - there will always be someone rolling with lower bonuses, and always someone with higher ones that have nothing to do with the choices they made in the game (class, feats, stat allocation, circumstantial actions, etc.).
Rolling the same number of dice is fair - the results rarely are, and only then by an extreme coincidence of chance. It is not fair that the permanent disadvantage or advantage they produce be suffered or enjoyed by players who are each wanting to have their characters survive and succeed in actions they take.
To be clear - you have misunderstood the point of this discussion and you can review that mistake at your leisure (the thread is all here). You can post whatever you like afterwards, I will not be here to read it, as I would probably be tempted to cynically think you are being deliberate in your miscomprehension, and deploying a strawman argument... but that would be, dare I say it, unfair?
Your other point is, frankly, a crass guess.
'Undoubtedly fewer' people who think stat allocation is unfair? You are hilarious - you have never known one, and neither have I, and you should admit to that. If you had encountered even one, you would have claimed that already...
I've been playing D&D for 39 years and never, ever encountered anyone who claimed point allocation (in any rpg system) was unfair. Your statement is baseless, and you know it.
Last edited: