Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="dkyle" data-source="post: 5873718" data-attributes="member: 70707">Avoiding giving one type of style a reward over the other is exactly what I'm trying to avoid.If preset Backgrounds and Themes are a subset of custom builds, it is virtually guaranteed that they will be inferior to the custom builds.&nbsp; Thus rewarding the custom builders.&nbsp; The bonuses for presets is meant to equalize the inherent bonuses for getting to combine elements however you want.My goal is that presets would be real options that even powergamers consider (like Essentials classes), not glorified examples that are only chosen out of ignorance, or apathy.A foregone conclusion?&nbsp; No.&nbsp; An incredibly likely conclusion borne out by every precedent I can think of?&nbsp; Yes.Example builds suck.&nbsp; They always do.&nbsp; Why should we expect these to be any different?Again, Min/Max proof?&nbsp; No.&nbsp; More resistant than others? Yes.&nbsp; That's the goal.&nbsp; Speaking of perfection and absolutes is not useful.This simply undercuts the entire purpose of this forum, and the blog post we're discussing.In what way is it &quot;wiser&quot; to not discuss the subject at hand, incorporating our experiences and perceptions?&nbsp; In what way is it better to not discuss?And the problem I'm &quot;fretting&quot; about occurs in every game I've ever seen which includes examples of a custom build system.&nbsp; It would be folly to assume it won't happen in 5E.&quot;Have some faith&quot;? How is that helpful?&nbsp; Does my faith somehow inspire them to make a better game?As far as I'm concerned, well-reasoned cynicism is infinitely &quot;wiser&quot; than silent optimism.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="dkyle, post: 5873718, member: 70707"] Avoiding giving one type of style a reward over the other is exactly what I'm trying to avoid. If preset Backgrounds and Themes are a subset of custom builds, it is virtually guaranteed that they will be inferior to the custom builds. Thus rewarding the custom builders. The bonuses for presets is meant to equalize the inherent bonuses for getting to combine elements however you want. My goal is that presets would be real options that even powergamers consider (like Essentials classes), not glorified examples that are only chosen out of ignorance, or apathy. A foregone conclusion? No. An incredibly likely conclusion borne out by every precedent I can think of? Yes. Example builds [I]suck[/I]. They always do. Why should we expect these to be any different? Again, Min/Max proof? No. More resistant than others? Yes. That's the goal. Speaking of perfection and absolutes is not useful. This simply undercuts the entire purpose of this forum, and the blog post we're discussing. In what way is it "wiser" to not discuss the subject at hand, incorporating our experiences and perceptions? In what way is it better to not discuss? And the problem I'm "fretting" about occurs in every game I've ever seen which includes examples of a custom build system. It would be folly to assume it [I]won't[/I] happen in 5E. "Have some faith"? How is [I]that[/I] helpful? Does my faith somehow inspire them to make a better game? As far as I'm concerned, well-reasoned cynicism is infinitely "wiser" than silent optimism. [/QUOTE]

Verification