Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="clearstream" data-source="post: 8458647" data-attributes="member: 71699">Not really. I can agree that &quot;building a reasonably efficient character and not gimping yourself&quot; by making your primary ability scores highest - as you are advised to do in the PHB - is not power gaming.Up thread your actual words implied that choosing an alignment of ASI and efficacy in play, was always power gaming. If true, the order of choosing race, class, and score allocation doesn't change that. I feel like your position has changed and I certainly would not find fault for that or hold you to any previous position.From the OP - &quot;For some reason the world comes together to mandate one very important rule that will permeate all societies for the endless future. Oddly, this declaration reflects how WotC is allowed to present character options during creation in their D&amp;D game. There can only be ONE official method.&quot;I very happily agree that there are a wide range of behaviours. In saying that, I cannot help but recall with irony that you recently very firmly told me that there was no such wide range of behaviours. That you knew player motivations better than they knew themselves, and any alignment of scores with efficacy in game must amount to power gaming. You don't recall making those arguments up-thread? Comments like &quot;...it still boils down to exactly one thing: &quot;I want a 16 because others can have it, and the game is unappealing to me because I am not as powerful as others (coud be)&quot;?Do you recall your words up-thread that &quot;let's look at rolling stats, which is still the only default option in the game. I'm not sure how many people are using this, in percentage. There are lots of people who use it for power reasons, because it's the only way in the rules to get really powerful scores...&quot; Is it right to say that over the course of our conversation, you have changed your mind?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="clearstream, post: 8458647, member: 71699"] Not really. I can agree that "[I]building a reasonably efficient character and not gimping yourself[/I]" by making your primary ability scores highest - as you are advised to do in the PHB - is not power gaming. Up thread your actual words implied that choosing an alignment of ASI and efficacy in play, was always power gaming. If true, the order of choosing race, class, and score allocation doesn't change that. I feel like your position has changed and I certainly would not find fault for that or hold you to any previous position. From the OP - "[I]For some reason the world comes together to mandate one very important rule that will permeate all societies for the endless future. Oddly, this declaration reflects how WotC is allowed to present character options during creation in their D&D game. There can only be ONE official method."[/I] I very happily agree that there are a wide range of behaviours. In saying that, I cannot help but recall with irony that you recently very firmly told me that there was no such wide range of behaviours. That you knew player motivations better than they knew themselves, and any alignment of scores with efficacy in game must amount to power gaming. You don't recall making those arguments up-thread? Comments like "[I]...it still boils down to exactly one thing: "I want a 16 because others can have it, and the game is unappealing to me because I am not as powerful as others (coud be)[/I]"? [I][/I] Do you recall your words up-thread that "[I]let's look at rolling stats, which is still the only default option in the game. I'm not sure how many people are using this, in percentage. There are lots of people who use it for power reasons, because it's the only way in the rules to get really powerful scores...[/I]" Is it right to say that over the course of our conversation, you have changed your mind? [/QUOTE]

Verification