No, I read and understood them. All the claims that you were speaking for the 5e community at large and their reasons for doing things.
When have I claimed to talk for, '5e community at large'? My OP:
I'm not saying that MC is purely about power gaming. Though if you go to the optimization section of these forums, it's rare to see a single class, while there are many, many 'optimized' builds that rely on multi classing. So it's hardly suprising folks associate MC with players attempting to work the mechanics rather than the character/fluff.
Anyway, we don't do it because weeeeell... no need. KISS and all that. Much as you can wrap a story around a heavily optimized MC character, you can do the same for a SC class character - so we do. Saves on paperwork, and generally less bullshankery.
A comment regarding the existence of an association between MC and power gaming. I then offer a possible reason as to why, or more accurately, imply that a reading of the Character Op forums might contribute to supporting/making this assumption.
Do you deny that there are those that associate MC with power gaming? That this thread hasn't featured a fair few that have demonstrated this association? That the OP of this thread doesn't include:
I've never really allowed multiclassing...I view it as an excuse make ridiculously broke characters.
So you *assumed*. Do you realize what they say about assuming?
And you boldened your z of realise. Why did you do this, after I used the word 'realise' in my post?
Lets put a finer, more reasonable point on your assertion. You know, for those backseaters sitting with you:
*You* associate multiclassing with powergaming.
There. Now its at least accurate.
And look! Now you're accusing me of something which is simply not true.
Let's make this easy. My post is simple - it's not science and it's not meant to be. Here's the crib notes:
- Do you accept that there are those that associate MC with power gaming?
- Could some of the content on the Character Op forum lead them to this, or support this assumption?*
*I've included to examples in the spoiler below, examples that I believe might contribute to supporting assumption that MC is associated with power gaming.
Here's some posts from the Character Op forum, with some examples of the responses that suggest the poster MC.
Best dpr archer build using UA?
-battlemaster\ranger + war cleric
The cleric multiclass can also use bless to help with sharpshooter
[5e DM Help] Keeping the lid on... what builds should I NOT allow?
Personally, I would say none. But the fine print would also read that it has to make sense for the character and not be something that is just done for purely stat-boosting means. By that I mean something along the lines of a Fighter deciding he wants to take a couple levels of Paladin to get Divine Strike, but nothing in his character suggests that he would be Paladin material.
2. Paladin/Sorcerer build is probably the most commonly used "power build", but even that is so reliant on Long Rests that it's not that bad. 3.Totem Barbarian 3/BM Fighter+. Honestly this build is only terrifyingly OP if you allow GWM. Without GWM, it's still the most potent general melee build but not that OP.
Death Cleric Build
So, we start off with a level of fighter, for the Constitution proficiency, the fighting style and the Second Wind. You know, to get through level 1.
Druid Optimization request
1 level of Life Domain cleric gives you super goodberries.
This is not about proving if, somehow, reading the Character Op forums will magically make someone believe that MC is connected to power gaming. This is not about proving that X, Y and Z is more powerful than A, B and Z. It is about exploring why some folks associate MC with power gaming, and showing that the Charater Op forum features posts that suggest the power of MC. For better or for worse, I believe that some folks will use this to either build on an assumption they have, or form one, regarding MC and Powergaming. I may be wrong, I may be right - what do we think?