Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Arrowhawk" data-source="post: 5664205" data-attributes="member: 6679551">That's too bad. Because you're thinking exactly like a guy who thinks showing you tube clips of Indiana Jones movies proves things about D&D.  I can see how my response might be confusing, but I've read some of your posts in other threads and I assumed you were capable of connecting the dots. I have three cakes. I have ranked them in the order that I like them and given them "numerical descriptors." Do you think I've just quantized the cakes?  No? Then why do you think using numerical descriptors is the same as quantizing things?   Nevertheless, using numerical descriptors has nothing to do with the discussion. Reducing a large and continuous set of values to a small descrete set ...does. If you think that means the same thing as using numerical descriptors, I can see why you are confused. Part of the confusion may be my using both "quantify" and "quantize." I thought it was clear that I was pointing out the problem with quantizing classes, not quantifying classes.  I think it's clear you can't quantify or quantize subjective qualities but you can quantify preferences.   Still, that doesn't seem to be the true source of the disconnect based on your post, but it may be part of the problem, if so, my bad. I'll pay more attention to which word I'm using. And no it is not.  You quote several different responses out of context and then try and present them as all talking about the same thing.  You seem to focus on words that identify quantitative things--amount, metric, quantify-- and then you suggest that they must invariably be talking about the same thing.  Uh...no.   You also seem to either to fail to understand the point that is being made in those quotes you reference, or you just are intentionally ignoring them because it doesn't suit the point you want to make...or rather debate. My concerns are 50% about the logic used to justify the Tier and 50% about the damage one does to the game in doing something like the Tier without doing a better job of identifying its limitations. While we seem to agree that Jaronk goes overboard, you seemed to be confused by the tangential discussion about "balance." For reasons I haven't tried to fathom, you seem to need to erroneously distill my position into something you can critique or be critical of. I'll spell it out: When you quantize (not quantify) something that is subjective/context based...you can't justify your quantization like it's provable fact. More to the point, the logic he employs is contradictory/inconsistent. The use of numerical discriptors is irrelevant to both those topics. Does that clear it up for you?</blockquote>

Verification