Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Maxperson" data-source="post: 8312020" data-attributes="member: 23751">1. You twice accused me using it when I never did.2. It's not even close to being the only argument you can make in favor of the champion.&nbsp; Nice use of the False Dichotomy there.&nbsp; &quot;Ad Populum&quot; and &quot;no argument in favor of the champion&quot; are not the only two choices.3. If you're going to accuse people of fallacies, get the fallacies right and don't use them yourself in the process.&quot;Good&quot; and &quot;bad&quot; are in the eye of the beholder.&nbsp; They are subjective opinions and you have yours, and I have mine.&nbsp; You can use your subjective opinion to value damage output over everything else and then compare Champions to Barbarians(or whatever), but even if you can show an objective difference in damage output, and you can, it's still going to be nothing but a subjective position to say Barbarians are better, since you've based your criteria on what you FEEL is best(damage).The thing with balance is that it's a pipe dream.&nbsp; It's utterly impossible to achieve in an RPG where you have different classes with different abilities.&nbsp; There will always be a &quot;weakest&quot; and a &quot;strongest&quot; at whatever criteria you are comparing.&nbsp; 5e got it right when it balanced the classes, since no class can dominate like they could in prior editions.&nbsp; The range of disparity is narrow enough not to matter to the game, but only to the personal opinions of those who play it. If it matters to you that the Champion doesn't deal as much damage as some other classes, don't play it.&nbsp; Don't assume that everyone else values things like you do, though.&nbsp; We can make our own decisions about what we value and whether the Champion is a good class or not.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Maxperson, post: 8312020, member: 23751"] 1. You twice accused me using it when I never did. 2. It's not even close to being the only argument you can make in favor of the champion. Nice use of the False Dichotomy there. "Ad Populum" and "no argument in favor of the champion" are not the only two choices. 3. If you're going to accuse people of fallacies, get the fallacies right and don't use them yourself in the process. "Good" and "bad" are in the eye of the beholder. They are subjective opinions and you have yours, and I have mine. You can use your subjective opinion to value damage output over everything else and then compare Champions to Barbarians(or whatever), but even if you can show an objective difference in damage output, and you can, it's still going to be nothing but a subjective position to say Barbarians are better, since you've based your criteria on what you FEEL is best(damage). The thing with balance is that it's a pipe dream. It's utterly impossible to achieve in an RPG where you have different classes with different abilities. There will always be a "weakest" and a "strongest" at whatever criteria you are comparing. 5e got it right when it balanced the classes, since no class can dominate like they could in prior editions. The range of disparity is narrow enough not to matter to the game, but only to the personal opinions of those who play it. If it matters to you that the Champion doesn't deal as much damage as some other classes, don't play it. Don't assume that everyone else values things like you do, though. We can make our own decisions about what we value and whether the Champion is a good class or not. [/QUOTE]

Verification