Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Bill Zebub" data-source="post: 8530986" data-attributes="member: 7031982">Let me try it this way, then I'll give up because it's just not important and I don't think I'm saying anything very controversial.I'll agree that Str 8 makes it pretty tough to be a good fighter.&nbsp; But if you can quantify just how bad Str 8 is for a fighter...let's say it's 3 standard deviations out (bottom 0.3%)...then my argument is that a really good player with that character can still be more effective than a player with a solid character who is in the bottom 0.3% of skill.In other words, making bad decisions can easily be a bigger negative factor than getting a -1 penalty to your primary rolls.The only data I have on that is that we have a player in our group like this, and they frequently make decisions (especially during combat) that basically wastes their turn, and doing nothing useful is worse than getting -1 to a primary roll.&nbsp; It's really worse than that, because sometimes they make decisions that actively make things worse for the rest of us.&nbsp; I mean, I guess they're at least there to absorb some incoming damage...so there's that.I would rather, in terms of effectiveness, have a fighter with 8 Str, played well, than this particular player.&nbsp; (Except they're a friend...or at least a partner of a friend...so I wouldn't really want to kick them out.)But I don't really want to keep arguing this.&nbsp; It's unprovable, and not even important.&nbsp; If you disagree...c'est la vie.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Bill Zebub, post: 8530986, member: 7031982"] Let me try it this way, then I'll give up because it's just not important and I don't think I'm saying anything very controversial. I'll agree that Str 8 makes it pretty tough to be a good fighter. But if you can quantify just how bad Str 8 is for a fighter...let's say it's 3 standard deviations out (bottom 0.3%)...then my argument is that a really good player with that character can still be more effective than a player with a solid character who is in the bottom 0.3% of skill. In other words, making bad decisions can [I]easily[/I] be a bigger negative factor than getting a -1 penalty to your primary rolls. The only data I have on that is that we have a player in our group like this, and they [I]frequently[/I] make decisions (especially during combat) that basically wastes their turn, and doing nothing useful is worse than getting -1 to a primary roll. It's really worse than that, because sometimes they make decisions that actively make things worse for the rest of us. I mean, I guess they're at least there to absorb some incoming damage...so there's that. I would rather, in terms of effectiveness, have a fighter with 8 Str, played well, than this particular player. (Except they're a friend...or at least a partner of a friend...so I wouldn't really want to kick them out.) But I don't really want to keep arguing this. It's unprovable, and not even important. If you disagree...[I]c'est la vie[/I]. [/QUOTE]

Verification