Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="CapnZapp" data-source="post: 6999431" data-attributes="member: 12731">I can certainly agree that good enough &lt;&gt; minmaxing. I've already said that &quot;i'm gonna use medium armor&quot; can be a well-functional thing. For style, for coolness, even for &quot;I really don't care as long as my AC is good enough&quot;.But when we (you, me, the OP) talk about &quot;end goals&quot; that refers to something else. The fact you might not want to have that discussion should not mean you should repurpose the OPs complaint and aims just to be able to say you're right. You can always say &quot;my end goal is...&quot; and add pretty much anything. That doesn't mean it's relevant to the complaint at hand.Please don't start a discussion about what &quot;efficient charbuilds&quot; and &quot;optimized&quot; means. Nobody has time for a discussion where &quot;optimized&quot; means &quot;making the most pancakes&quot;, Aaron.Just accept that a minmaxer has much less use for medium armor, and let's move on. ---We've been on a side track, Aaron, so I haven't had the time to say that I actually don't think the system is broken nearly enough to warrant a fix. Sure medium armor is the red-headed stepchild of armor categories, but since there still exists definitive use cases (both as until something better comes up, and as more long-term equipment) I don't think it's worth the effort just to somewhat increase that usage. Sure armor usage isn't an ideal 33%, 33%, 33% spread (for some value of &quot;ideal&quot;). But it isn't 50%, 0%, 50% either. Whether it's 50%, 10%, 40% or some other value I really don't care. It's something that sees use. I'm fine with that. Adding a third maximum would be a rather big change to the core of D&amp;D. I don't think it's worth it - there are bigger fish to fry.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="CapnZapp, post: 6999431, member: 12731"] I can certainly agree that good enough <> minmaxing. I've already said that "i'm gonna use medium armor" can be a well-functional thing. For style, for coolness, even for "I really don't care as long as my AC is good enough". But when we (you, me, the OP) talk about "end goals" that refers to something else. The fact you might not want to have that discussion should not mean you should repurpose the OPs complaint and aims just to be able to say you're right. You can always say "my end goal is..." and add pretty much anything. That doesn't mean it's relevant to the complaint at hand. Please don't start a discussion about what "efficient charbuilds" and "optimized" means. Nobody has time for a discussion where "optimized" means "making the most pancakes", Aaron. Just accept that a minmaxer has much less use for medium armor, and let's move on. --- We've been on a side track, Aaron, so I haven't had the time to say that I actually don't think the system is broken nearly enough to warrant a fix. Sure medium armor is the red-headed stepchild of armor categories, but since there still exists definitive use cases (both as until something better comes up, and as more long-term equipment) I don't think it's worth the effort just to somewhat increase that usage. Sure armor usage isn't an ideal 33%, 33%, 33% spread (for some value of "ideal"). But it isn't 50%, 0%, 50% either. Whether it's 50%, 10%, 40% or some other value I really don't care. It's something that sees use. I'm fine with that. Adding a third maximum would be a rather big change to the core of D&D. I don't think it's worth it - there are bigger fish to fry. [/QUOTE]

Verification