D&D 5E Magic Item Math of 5e

[Ancalagon]

It's interesting to note that based on the table, +3 plate is *far rarer* than a vorpal sword. That takes a bit to wrap your head around, but I think it's the reflection that + 3 plate is a *lot more powerful* than people realized.

 

[ccs]

Aside: I brought it to the attention of the mods that the Laugh button doesn't always work as intended and that it can (and is) used to bully other posters. The complete opposite of the intended function, basically.

Laughing *at* somebody is not the same as laughing *with* that person.

I was dismissed.

Well unless they also post a reply in the thread, how do you tell if the person posting the laugh is intending it to be with you or at you?
All I see in my notifications is: So-and-So clicked laugh for post ____. Eh, OK. If I've entertained you? Great. If you're trying to mock me? Well then you've failed because without a reply A) I can't determine the context you meant it in & B) even with a reply it's still the internet and I just don't care....

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

Aside: I brought it to the attention of the mods that the Laugh button doesn't always work as intended and that it can (and is) used to bully other posters. The complete opposite of the intended function, basically.

Laughing *at* somebody is not the same as laughing *with* that person.

I was dismissed.

I could swear I saw a moderator say that if someone is suspected of misusing the laugh button that they should be reported to the moderators because they can have their ability to click laugh shut off for misuse.

 

[CapnZapp]

I would much prefer if the user interface (text and icon) was tweaked to make it clear you're laughing with the post, rather than at the post. The icon could be made more obviously friendly. Etc.

This would solve the problem once and for all. Even if you WANT to use the Laugh button to belittle the poster, you won't accomplish that goal when nobody can interpret you as anything but friendly and supportive.

 

[CapnZapp]

PS. Obviously this discussion belongs in Meta. Mods, feel free to break it out and move it there.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

Even if you WANT to use the Laugh button to belittle the poster, you won't accomplish that goal when nobody can interpret you as anything but friendly and supportive.

You mean like if clicking the laugh button was demonstrably a benefit to the recipient such as by increasing their forum experience points, adding to the impression that the poster is well received on the forum and that they know what they are talking about, while also improving the user's standing on the ranking list of who the funniest posters are?

I mean, I can see how someone might want the current laugh functionality to belittle someone, but it already can't possibly accomplish that because of how it is designed - unless you believe that someone can belittle another person by giving XP to a post of theirs which might not have actually deserved it.

 

[Maxperson]

You mean like if clicking the laugh button was demonstrably a benefit to the recipient such as by increasing their forum experience points, adding to the impression that the poster is well received on the forum and that they know what they are talking about, while also improving the user's standing on the ranking list of who the funniest posters are?

I mean, I can see how someone might want the current laugh functionality to belittle someone, but it already can't possibly accomplish that because of how it is designed - unless you believe that someone can belittle another person by giving XP to a post of theirs which might not have actually deserved it.

You can accomplish multiple goals with one act. The laugh button can in fact belittle someone, while at the same time giving them exp.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

You can accomplish multiple goals with one act. The laugh button can in fact belittle someone, while at the same time giving them exp.

I disagree. Not that a single act can accomplish multiple goals, that much is true - but that belittling someone and giving them XP are not mutually exclusive goals.

 

[Maxperson]

I disagree. Not that a single act can accomplish multiple goals, that much is true - but that belittling someone and giving them XP are not mutually exclusive goals.

So if I punch you in the nose and break it, then give you 5 bucks, I have helped you, but not hurt you? That's the same as belittling someone and then giving them some small amount of exp. They aren't even close to being mutually exclusive.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

So if I punch you in the nose and break it, then give you 5 bucks, I have helped you, but not hurt you? That's the same as belittling someone and then giving them some small amount of exp. They aren't even close to being mutually exclusive.

No, Max, punching me in the face and giving me 5 bucks are two actions, not one.

Clicking "laugh" is the giving me five bucks part of your example - you can give me five bucks and mean it with every bit of meaning that you can for it to belittle me, and yet it doesn't because, hey, I've got 5 bucks I didn't have before hand.