Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ClaytonCross" data-source="post: 7563721" data-attributes="member: 6880599">Clear = TransparentOpaque (not able to be seen through; not transparent.)Clear is not the opposite of color its the opposite of opaque. Remember this:Yep... your picked an argument that is vague and abstract to get me to agree with something I don't believe then justify your argument on its irrelevance. My point from the post stands. You have a subclass or you don't have subclass. Trying to say that sorting marbles on a color scale because you don't consider clear a color when in fact a clear red marble would be red with transparency is distraction from the fact that if a class does not have a subclass it does not count as a class with subclass.Not in this case. You are trying to create a tangent argument that is irrelevant to the thread to demonstrate I am not personally valuable enough to have a point.......yep. Just as I said, I mentioned this already because I saw this coming based on your past behavior. So I added the full comments to the top for context where you ignore the real statement at the bottom to argue a side argument you brought up to prove a point by making an unequal comparison that you either expected me to buy despite not being an adequate parallel. Then when I didn't you dismiss me as unreasonable for not agreeing with something that is not relevant to the thread and that was never more than an example... a bad example.As I stated above, You ether have a subclass or you do not. It is an absolute. That being relevant to the conversion and on point the thread, do you have any argument against that?Secondly, Do you have counter argument to my post response to your questions that you have ignored?-Reposted here for your conveyance--sniped, place holder text-I did as requested below, but I go on to explain why I don't think that is the correct direction."Class Distribution broken down by subclass when applicable (Active Characters)" So a Level 2 fighter is just a "Fighter" but a level 3 fighter would be called by subclass like "Eldritch Knight".However, I don't see the point of looking at this way. Like you said, multi-class characters would be counted twice unless you designate only characters with one class. That said having one for classes then breaking individual classes by subclass on different slides would be more precise. You could then say, Fighters are the most popular class and Champions are the most popular subclass in fighters. If you want to make that more comparable between classes you put a number under the percent. Then you could look at the number of Champions on the Fighter Class chart and compare that to the number of Rogue Thieves if you wanted to make that comparison. Also, you could under the Percent Total # / Non-Multiclass # / Multi-class Number for each listing under fighter and the individual sub classes. That then lets you say, "well yes the standard fighter is on a lot more characters than the champion but is clearly a 2 level dip since they are mostly multi-classes" because the data will be present. In the End I don't think trying to label one slide with all the classes and subclass is a good idea. Looking at your question, it seems to me you could put more useful information on 1 "Class Distribution(Active Characters) " and 12 "X class Distribution by subclass when applicable (Active Characters) " with Total # / Non-Multiclass # / Multi-class Number # under the name and percent.</blockquote>

Verification