Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ClaytonCross" data-source="post: 7561459" data-attributes="member: 6880599">People also use invalid math to prove points. Example: "Average DPR with % hit", we have talked about it before that this is not an acute representation of actual game play damage being that average DPR is only correct about 3% of the time for any specific battle, does not account for 0 sum damage on miss, or loss of damage from over kill... however, I don't have a better metric for measuring damage. So I use it too sometimes to prove a point as do you. The same is true for D&D Beyond data. As @<a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/member.php?u=1" target="_blank">Morrus</a> pointed out...     You are correct that 1. It will be used to argue and 2. it is not accurate... However, when it agrees with an argument anyone is likely to take 3% of proof over 0% proof as a point in their favor and when it disagrees with your argument your likely to say its inaccurate unusable metric that does really support anything without providing any metric to counter it. 3% is more accurate than nothing but a lot less than 100% so both are technically correct. In the end everyone likely to except an answer you already agree with and dismiss one you disagree with.      I find that most conversations are not about changing someone else's opinions but developing your own and finding some level of common understanding which might shift both extremes a little closer. I actually find that to be the bet out come in most discussions. Their are some things that are factually wrong but in an abstract game that exist in imagination their are a lot of if you do this A is true and if you do this B is true.      Example, Hold Person is not a "damage spell" but can be responsible for great deal of damage making it one of the most powerful attack spells in the game... but how do you measure that? People arguing it might bring up some good points of how to use it and work together as a group or even better ways to use direct damage spells. Anyone involved in the debate has potential to be a better player because of the debate and changes to perspective. No is likely to change the mind of people who disagree that hold person does more or less damage than X spell. The conversation becomes the valuable part of the thread not "winning the debate". Metrics might be useful in this conversation or they might muddy the conversation bogging it down. It really depends on the topic and the context of the discussion. Sometimes 3% is enough to remove the 0 sum arguments just like D&D Beyond data might not be useful reflecting the sum of the D&D community but with a quite large user base they do have enough people and data to argue that a "type of player" exist in quantity vs "its a small percentage of the community" or "no one does that" debate points.</blockquote>

Verification