FrogReaver
The most respectful and polite poster ever
Yes. But you're only half the time behind the guy who started at 15.
That doesn’t really address my objection.
Yes. But you're only half the time behind the guy who started at 15.
Your objection applies to campaigns where the max would be reached even if you started with a 15 and you would get to play using that max for a significant number of sessions. I don't think that is a common situation. But yes, if that was the sort of campaign you were planning, then it indeed might be an issue.That doesn’t really address my objection.
So, let me see if I can catalog the ways that the validity of the D&DBeyond data is getting dismissed:
Did I miss any?
- People use it to "test out" optimal builds more than they use it for building other kinds of characters.
- They pick those combinations because they are thematic, not for the mechanical synergy. (Tiefling paladins? Really?)
- There are so many Champion fighters that clearly people aren't optimizing much.
Your objection applies to campaigns where the max would be reached even if you started with a 15 and you would get to play using that max for a significant number of sessions. I don't think that is a common situation. But yes, if that was the sort of campaign you were planning, then it indeed might be an issue.
Here's mine: overwhelming majority of players don't use D&D Beyond. Like this forum, it is for people who take the game more seriously and thus might be more interested in character optimisation and stuff. I really don't think majority of players either understand or care about the sort of issues we're talking about here.So, let me see if I can catalog the ways that the validity of the D&DBeyond data is getting dismissed:
Did I miss any?
- People use it to "test out" optimal builds more than they use it for building other kinds of characters.
- They pick those combinations because they are thematic, not for the mechanical synergy. (Tiefling paladins? Really?)
- There are so many Champion fighters that clearly people aren't optimizing much.
Yes, I consider that a feature not a bug. But even if you didn't think that, in practice it can only apply to situations where 'being equal' would have been reached in the first place.My objection pertains to the potential of being equal if the game goes long enough. Your rule removes that potential.
Yes, I consider that a feature not a bug. But even if you didn't think that, in practice it can only apply to situations where 'being equal' would have been reached in the first place.
I don't get why it matters... Why would it matter that your halfling could match the goliath's strength by level twelve if the campaign ends on level ten?It’s not about being actually equal at any point. It’s about the potential that given time you will be. I don’t get what’s so hard to grasp about that.
What's anti-thematic about a planar powered race picking a divinely powered class? Paladins being good is kind of an old-school thing, and also I think a lot of people find the dichotomy between "evil" race and "good" class to be compelling.They pick those combinations because they are thematic, not for the mechanical synergy. (Tiefling paladins? Really?)