5e Character Guides - why rate all features?

[Mort]

Why what does that help? Saying something is good and explaining it's good are two very different things. Your not explaining why it's good to do that. You just keep stating it is good.

Just trying to be clear,
Are you asking why is it good to distill a large amount of information into an easily digestible format (such as a color, number or star rating) in addition to giving the information?

If I'm experienced player knowing how good a guide creator thinks the monks unarmored defense is may give me some insight into his thought process and or let me know if his assumptions on the game line up with mine. But if I'm already that advanced of a player a guide likely isn't very useful to me in the first place.

For players that are newer and can benefit a lot from guides, is that information useful at all?

Again, are you asking why a new player would want a large amount of information distilled into an easily digestible format - in addition to the information itself?

 

[FrogReaver]

Just trying to be clear,
Are you asking why is it good to distill a large amount of information into an easily digestible format (such as a color, number or star rating) in addition to giving the information?

Nope.

Again, are you asking why a new player would want a large amount of information distilled into an easily digestible format - in addition to the information itself?

Nope again.

I understand the that rating things is to make comparing them easier, more easily digestable as you put it. If you don't want to compare then what purpose does rating serve? What good is it? How is it useful for a player to see you rate unarmored defense on a monk as whatever you rate it as? How does making it easy to compare unarmored defense with extra attack help anyone? It feels like you keep on avoiding this question.

 

[Azzy]

Out of curiosity... Where are all these class guides that you lot are arguing over their format?

 

[FrogReaver]

Out of curiosity... Where are all these class guides that you lot are arguing over their format?

http://www.enworld.org/forum/forumdisplay.php?363-Character-Builds-amp-Optimization

 

[Azzy]

http://www.enworld.org/forum/forumdisplay.php?363-Character-Builds-amp-Optimization

Thank you!

 

[Mort]

Nope again.

I understand the that rating things is to make comparing them easier, more easily digestable as you put it. If you don't want to compare then what purpose does rating serve? What good is it? How is it useful for a player to see you rate unarmored defense on a monk as whatever you rate it as?

ratings allow the imparting of information quickly - and that's why they're useful, for main class abilities as well as choices. The rating distills the writer's opinion of the ability into an easy to understand point.

The explanation that follows then explains the rating, hopefully in a satisfactory manner or at least well enough to allow for proper agreement or dissent.

A player seeing the rating on unarmored defense, per your question, would see that despite being without armor, a monk can still get decent AC - even before looking at the explanation. That's likely important to someone who wants to play a monk.

How does making it easy to compare unarmored defense with extra attack help anyone? It feels like you keep on avoiding this question.

When multiclassing, do I want an extra attack or significantly better AC, or are both good options?

Do I want to take paladin all the way to 6th? If I see a highly rated option for that level, it will influence my decision.

Guides are there to assist with decisions, not only within a class but to decide how to approach an ability within the class. Properly done, ratings help with that.

 

[FrogReaver]

ratings allow the imparting of information quickly - and that's why they're useful, for main class abilities as well as choices. The rating distills the writer's opinion of the ability into an easy to understand point.

The explanation that follows then explains the rating, hopefully in a satisfactory manner or at least well enough to allow for proper agreement or dissent.

A player seeing the rating on unarmored defense, per your question, would see that despite being without armor, a monk can still get decent AC - even before looking at the explanation. That's likely important to someone who wants to play a monk.

Let me try this a different way. Why would a newer player, someone that should benefit greatly from a guide.. why would that player care whether the guide writer thought unarmored defense was good or bad. When all monks get it does it really matter to such a player if it's the highest rated or lowest rated feature listed? What difference to such a player would it make?

When multiclassing, do I want an extra attack or significantly better AC, or are both good options?

Do I want to take paladin all the way to 6th? If I see a highly rated option for that level, it will influence my decision.

Guides are there to assist with decisions, not only within a class but to decide how to approach an ability within the class. Properly done, ratings help with that.

Does it making that comparison of unarmored defense and extra attack easy actually help in any context other than multiclassing?

 

[Mort]

Let me try this a different way. Why would a newer player, someone that should benefit greatly from a guide.. why would that player care whether the guide writer thought unarmored defense was good or bad. When all monks get it does it really matter to such a player if it's the highest rated or lowest rated feature listed? What difference to such a player would it make?

Because, as a new player, I want to know what I'm getting into?

Because, as a new player, it helps to get an at a glance answer as to where the class excels or is weak?

Does it making that comparison of unarmored defense and extra attack easy actually help in any context other than multiclassing?

1. Multiclassing is popular, so isn't that enough?

2. What's wrong with being able to tell, at a glance, when a class is stuck with lackluster abilities? Especially if there's no choice on the matter.

Just because you're stuck with the ability, doesn't mean you don't want top know how useful it is and/or how it stacks up in the game in general. Further, the grade/ ranking is really just shorthand for the longer analysis the guide writer did anyway - I don't think putting it on does more harm than good.

 

[FrogReaver]

Because, as a new player, I want to know what I'm getting into?

But the individual ability ratings don't tell you what you are getting into. The guides class summary and strengths and weaknesses section does that.

Because, as a new player, it helps to get an at a glance answer as to where the class excels or is weak?

But the individual ability ratings aren't what tells you that. The guides class summary and strengths and weaknesses section does that.

1. Multiclassing is popular, so isn't that enough?

Mutliclassing is not an answer. That's one of the reasons we can't move forward. I show abilities whose ratings depend on the class in question. Very basic abilities that depend on the class in question for how good they are. We agree and it even gets stated by both sides that we should compare abilities of class in relation to other abilities of that same class. Awesome. Then multiclassing gets brought up again and then we have to stop the whole conversation and go over again and again why multiclassing isn't an answer (it's because abilities are always going to be rated differently depending on the entire class package). Then once that's established I start asking what the use of ability ratings are and undoubetedly multiclassing gets brought up again.

You see it's a big circular cluster. The conversation is going no where because we keep on having to retread the same waters again and again.

2. What's wrong with being able to tell, at a glance, when a class is stuck with lackluster abilities? Especially if there's no choice on the matter.

Because you really can't. It's typically the classes whole package that makes the ability good or bad and not a single ability in isolation.

Just because you're stuck with the ability, doesn't mean you don't want top know how useful it is and/or how it stacks up in the game in general. Further, the grade/ ranking is really just shorthand for the longer analysis the guide writer did anyway - I don't think putting it on does more harm than good.

Ratings don't actually tell you how useful it is or how it stacks up in the game. Even in the same guide things of much differing power levels get rated the same. Abilities aren't independent they are built class packages and so the best you can really gather is how the class itself stacks up and that's something I do expect author's of guides to talk about in their initial class overview section.

 

[Dessert Nomad]

Because, as a new player, I want to know what I'm getting into?

Because, as a new player, it helps to get an at a glance answer as to where the class excels or is weak?

They don't impart that information, and in may cases hide that information. Assume you're talking about a single-class, normal build. Rogues are great at using dex-based weapons, and (other than the longbow) have proficiency with the martial weapons they'd like to use. But rogue weapon proficiencies are consistently rated lower than all of the classes that get 'all martial', simply because martial has a long list of weapons, even though a regular rogue has no use for a polearm or greataxe. Similarly, a rogue's light armor proficiency is ranked below a fighter or paladin's heavy armor proficiency, even though light armor is the only armor he'd want to use, as medium armor is either more money for the same AC or more money for worse, and heavy armor requires pumping a stat not otherwise needed, provides marginal AC benefit, and trashes the core ability to sneak well.

Exactly what does it actually tell you if a Monk's unarmed defense is ranks as gold vs 2nd best blue vs 3rd best blue vs black on a guide? If one guide ranks the monk version as blue but ranks the barbarian's as gold or black, what does that actually tell you? I don't see that the color ranking actually provides real information.