Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Maxperson" data-source="post: 8389410" data-attributes="member: 23751">You've done nothing but alter my point.&nbsp; My point isn't what you want to make it into. Doesn't matter.&nbsp; The reason is not lack of appeal.&nbsp; The reason is less realism.&nbsp; Let's put it this way.&nbsp; I wouldn't like my house to be damaged.&nbsp; Damaged isn't necessarily the reason, though.&nbsp; Fire OR tornado would be the reason.&nbsp; So when I tell you that I don't want my house to burn down, don't try to tell me that my reason is that I don't want my house to be damaged.&nbsp; I'm specifying fire for a reason.&nbsp; I can't stand the smell of smoke and would rather deal with wet than fire.I was just pointing out that I've seen them.&nbsp; I didn't twist your words.It's funny how one of the worst(ranger) is one that I've seen played the most and to good effect.&nbsp; As I've said before, 5e is very forgiving of &quot;low&quot; numbers like 14 and rangers.&nbsp; You can still be good with them.&nbsp; Not passable.&nbsp; Not viable.&nbsp; GOOD. Higher numbers just make you very good or great.And your current argument is that some players have guessed at the hidden math and agreed that they are correct.&nbsp; Neither of us has a solid position here.Yep.&nbsp; And it was 3, not 4.&nbsp; 0 of which are equal to the array.It takes far fewer to see the average at work with a single 50/50 flip being the test.&nbsp; When it's 6 numbers with a 3-18 range determined by 4 dice, dropping the lowest, it's just not the same thing.&nbsp; You're comparing a firecracker to a bomb and saying they're the same because both explode.You're guessing at these things again.&nbsp; No matter how you slice it, though, the array is not equal to rolling. In fact, since the bolded portion is true, then you're saying that even the averages of the two are not equal.&nbsp; You've helped my argument.10 rolls is two entire campaigns for a group with 5 players and a DM.&nbsp; If we take the rolling average of 74, 2 rolls hit that average and 8 did not.&nbsp; That's an 80% failure rate.&nbsp; If I did 10 more(two more entire campaigns of characters) do you think I'd get different results?Your position is equality and my example blows your position out of the water.&nbsp; Your argument that the two methods have different averages just enhances my position, even though you don't have proof of the designer intent you are claiming.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Maxperson, post: 8389410, member: 23751"] You've done nothing but alter my point. My point isn't what you want to make it into. Doesn't matter. The reason is not lack of appeal. The reason is less realism. Let's put it this way. I wouldn't like my house to be damaged. Damaged isn't necessarily the reason, though. Fire OR tornado would be the reason. So when I tell you that I don't want my house to burn down, don't try to tell me that my reason is that I don't want my house to be damaged. I'm specifying fire for a reason. I can't stand the smell of smoke and would rather deal with wet than fire. I was just pointing out that I've seen them. I didn't twist your words. It's funny how one of the worst(ranger) is one that I've seen played the most and to good effect. As I've said before, 5e is very forgiving of "low" numbers like 14 and rangers. You can still be good with them. Not passable. Not viable. [U][B]GOOD[/B][/U]. Higher numbers just make you very good or great. And your current argument is that some players have guessed at the hidden math and agreed that they are correct. Neither of us has a solid position here. Yep. And it was 3, not 4. 0 of which are equal to the array. It takes far fewer to see the average at work with a single 50/50 flip being the test. When it's 6 numbers with a 3-18 range determined by 4 dice, dropping the lowest, it's just not the same thing. You're comparing a firecracker to a bomb and saying they're the same because both explode. You're guessing at these things again. No matter how you slice it, though, the array is not equal to rolling. In fact, since the bolded portion is true, then you're saying that even the averages of the two are not equal. You've helped my argument. 10 rolls is two entire campaigns for a group with 5 players and a DM. If we take the rolling average of 74, 2 rolls hit that average and 8 did not. That's an 80% failure rate. If I did 10 more(two more entire campaigns of characters) do you think I'd get different results? Your position is equality and my example blows your position out of the water. Your argument that the two methods have different averages just enhances my position, even though you don't have proof of the designer intent you are claiming. [/QUOTE]

Verification