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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 8390548" data-attributes="member: 6801228">Honestly, at this point your analogy is failing to be useful. Yes, you've said it is about realism. But that realism is tied to your aesthetic sense of the game and what you find appealing.See, what you just said? That's a homebrew. You can't know how many there are. What the ranger would actually get for a spell slot. "There are celestials, dragons, and fey within six cubic miles of us. I don't know where or how many." Is the dragon five miles above you and flying away? You don't know. Are the fey sleeping in a tree 4 and a half miles east? You don't know. Is the celestial bound in a drow prison six miles under the earth? You don't know. All you know is that somewhere within 3,840 acres of flat territory, and possibly 6 miles up or down, there exists some number of fey, some number of dragons, and some number of celestials. Or beings under Nystuls' magic aura to appear as such. And considering you spent a spell slot... you likely suspected something was in the area, so you now know... just about what you knew before you spent the spell slot. Somewhere, there is something.And yet the 65% aligns with the 16 and the expected AC for CR. It wasn't arbitrarily found, and so dismissing it as arbitrary because we could just be doing the math wrong isn't convincing.Equal does not mean identical. All people are equal under the law, that doesn't mean all people are identical. Or that they are even treated identically, as children are treated differently under the law than adults. And people with mental illness differently again.And so what? You know that there are millions of players for DnD right? So, if you think it would take 5 players 100 years, then it should take take 1 million players (5/1,000,000 = 0.000005 * 100 years = 0.0005 * 12 months = 0.006 * 30 days = 0.18) Less than a day to roll that many times. You seem to be under the misapprehension that the statistical average is going to show up in every single campaign that is rolled at a table. This would explain why you seem to think that understanding this average and using it for the game is "impossible" because any given table might not match it. But that's not how these things are designed, They found the average because it is well recorded from people who study these things, and then built around that. Yes, when you roll some people will be above the average and some below it, that is the point of rolling, but that doesn't mean the average doesn't exist and that doesn't mean you don't build around that average.Yes, that is the point of a static array, that it will be the same every single time. This shouldn't be news for you. But that array is built close to the average (not exact, because the designers didn't want to give a 16, and they wanted an 8). And they still built around the average, allowing for people who are more powerful than average to be powerful and those weaker than average to be weaker.,If you decide to randomly roll, you could potentially have any number of combinations. Some people don't like that. They'd rather be average than risk being devastatingly weak. That is their choice, that you are trying to take away because you think being allowed to choose the average is unrealistic and somehow bad because of it. I don't care if you as the DM don't get to see someone roll (11, 10, 10, 9, 8, 7) or (18, 18, 16, 15, 12, 12) or (14, 13, 15, 9, 8, 11). This rule isn't about you as the DM. It is an option given to players to take the average instead of rolling, because stats are surprisingly important. Just like you can roll hp or take the average. It isn't about you, it isn't about the world of DnD, it is about the players having the choice to not be tempted to suicide their characters so they can have the character they wanted.</blockquote>

Verification