Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="CapnZapp" data-source="post: 7869847" data-attributes="member: 12731">Sigh.This is what keeps the game from ever becoming mechanically interesting.Your argument taken in absurdum means that just because one feat provides &quot;still a bonus&quot; (say, a +1) while another provides a greater bonus (say, a +99), &quot;a lesser bonus is still a bonus, not a trap&quot;. Congratulations! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f922.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":sick:" title="Sick&nbsp; &nbsp; :sick:"&nbsp; data-smilie="19"data-shortname=":sick:" /> By arguing the opportunity cost of -98 is &quot;still a bonus&quot; simply by your feat still providing a &quot;lesser&quot; bonus you have reduced the entire argument to merely bad faith word play!Meanwhile even a child can tell you're wrong in every sense that mean something. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f612.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":cautious:" title="Cautious&nbsp; &nbsp; :cautious:"&nbsp; data-smilie="13"data-shortname=":cautious:" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="CapnZapp, post: 7869847, member: 12731"] Sigh. This is what keeps the game from ever becoming mechanically interesting. Your argument taken [I]in absurdum[/I] means that just because one feat provides "still a bonus" (say, a +1) while another provides a greater bonus (say, a +99), "a lesser bonus is still a bonus, not a trap". Congratulations! :sick: By arguing the opportunity cost of -98 is "still a bonus" simply by your feat still providing a "lesser" bonus you have reduced the entire argument to merely bad faith word play! Meanwhile even a child can tell you're wrong in every sense that mean something. :cautious: [/QUOTE]

Verification