Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 8388583" data-attributes="member: 6801228">Your point is to say that a person not being allowed to take a legal option that in no way changes the power of the game is the same as not being allowed to cheat and break the power of the game, because both are a "restriction" on character creation. Sitting outside a coffee shop and using their wifi without going inside is breaking the law (technically). Building a nuclear bomb under a major city with the intent to kills hundreds of thousands is breaking the law. These things are not the same, despite the fact that both are breaking the law. You keep claiming that the fact that one of these is cheating that spits in the face of fair and expected play and rips the social contract to shreds is irrelevant, but really, it is the only part of it that is relevant. Using the standard array isn't cheating. Comparing it to cheating and saying "well you are okay with preventing one and not the other" is ludicrous. You should recognize a False Equivalence, you accuse people of them often enough.No, because picking two races is cheating. Picking two classes is cheating. Rolling two dice instead of one for hit points after 1st level, is cheating. Starting gold is highly negotiable, but if you aren't consulting with your DM and just take an amount of gold not allowed by the character creation rules, you are cheating. If you right 9th level spell slots on your character sheet at level 1, you are cheating. If you write 80 AC on your character sheet, you are cheating.Using the Standard Array is not cheating. It is an allowed choice, in the base rules. Stop trying to compare cheating with picking between two legal options.Without being too imbalanced I would say. Because there is a clear imbalance in the guy whose highest stat is a 20 and the one whom has a 14. A blatantly impossible to miss imbalance.No CEO on the planet is not market saavy enough to avoid outright stating it. And, yes, some of the phone damage was from dropping. Not all of it. Some of those laptops might have be used heavily... but that isn't misusing a device meant for daily use. And I know people whose brand new car broke down in the first month. But, your point is that no successful company would ever take 6% to 10% of customers maybe being unhappy because they took a risk as an acceptable amount. I've shown multiple searches that took me only minutes to find, that hint at the fact that... actually, while 10% might be a little high for some, it falls into an expected trend. 90% to 94% of the customer base being happy is a tremendous success. Stop trying to act like it is somehow negligent and impossible that a company sees that.You can't account for a difference that big while designing the game. You just can't. You need to pick a middle number. 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, and 20 can't all be the middle number. Some of them have to be high, and some of the have to be low. And we all know that 18-20 is the high end of the scale. Nobody sits down at the table with an 18 expecting to be average. 16 is average. 14 is low. You can hate that fact all you want, but it is how the game has been analyzed and talked about since the release.Minimize the level of random by giving us more information, which changes nothing about the process. And if we had even more information, it would probably appear even less random. The appearance of randomness in this case is a lack of information. Given perfect information (which is likely impossible) there would be no randomness.4 , 8 and 10 appear to be the closest mathematically, but again, the point of the array is that it is static, and adheres to the average. Of course blindly throwing darts at a board means you aren't going to hit a bullseye every single throw. But even with as trivially few results as 10 tries is, you got three that were darn close to an exact mathemtical value match. System working as intended.</blockquote>

Verification