Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="ECMO3" data-source="post: 9737457" data-attributes="member: 7030563">I don't see any evidence of that.&nbsp; I have played 5E with dozens (perhaps hundreds) of players in numerous countries and I would say it is not most people I have played with.Being mechanically better is not the same as being more valuable if you care about story and role play.&nbsp; For some people it is, and let those people do their thing.Ok how do you balance the Heavy Armor Master feat with the Mage Slayer feat?&nbsp;&nbsp; One is going to be WAY more powerful if you are fighting a horde of goblins, the other is WAY more powerful if you are fighting Vecna and I don't see how you keep the fiction there and make them equal.I think your picture illustrates my position.&nbsp; All choices are not equal or identical, there is a clear right and there is a clear left.&nbsp; But if there is equivalence then all choices are trivial and that is the problem I have with balance.Also your Chicago example flys in the face of your argument for mathematical equivalence and you actually have it backwards, they are quantitatively different but not qualitatively different.&nbsp; All of them get you to Chicago (qualitative),&nbsp; Flying gets you there a lot faster (quantitative), costs more money (quantitative), releases tons of pollution (quantitative).&nbsp; I can fly there in 5 hours (give or take), drive in 18, take a greyhound in about 30 or take a train in about 50 hours.&nbsp; All of them get me to Chicago eventually, i.e. qualitatively the same, they vary in quantitative measures -how much they cost, how long they take, how much harm they do to the environment.If I am to take this analogy at face value a PC doing 5 DPR is equivalent to a PC doing 50 DPR because both of them kill the bad guy.&nbsp; They get you to the same outcome, more or less (dead bad guy), it just takes the low damage guy longer to do it.&nbsp; Is that your definition of equivalence and balance?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="ECMO3, post: 9737457, member: 7030563"] I don't see any evidence of that. I have played 5E with dozens (perhaps hundreds) of players in numerous countries and I would say it is not most people I have played with. Being mechanically better is not the same as being more valuable if you care about story and role play. For some people it is, and let those people do their thing. Ok how do you balance the Heavy Armor Master feat with the Mage Slayer feat? One is going to be WAY more powerful if you are fighting a horde of goblins, the other is WAY more powerful if you are fighting Vecna and I don't see how you keep the fiction there and make them equal. I think your picture illustrates my position. All choices are not equal or identical, there is a clear right and there is a clear left. But if there is equivalence then all choices are trivial and that is the problem I have with balance. Also your Chicago example flys in the face of your argument for mathematical equivalence and you actually have it backwards, they are quantitatively different but not qualitatively different. All of them get you to Chicago (qualitative), Flying gets you there a lot faster (quantitative), costs more money (quantitative), releases tons of pollution (quantitative). I can fly there in 5 hours (give or take), drive in 18, take a greyhound in about 30 or take a train in about 50 hours. All of them get me to Chicago eventually, i.e. qualitatively the same, they vary in quantitative measures -how much they cost, how long they take, how much harm they do to the environment. If I am to take this analogy at face value a PC doing 5 DPR is equivalent to a PC doing 50 DPR because both of them kill the bad guy. They get you to the same outcome, more or less (dead bad guy), it just takes the low damage guy longer to do it. Is that your definition of equivalence and balance? [/QUOTE]

Verification