-3
\$\begingroup\$

Another question closed unnecessarily, another question we need to drag into meta to save it. This time we have Can you compare and contrast a Battle Smith Artificer vs a Paladin with a single dip in Hexblade?

  • “Too broad” isn’t applicable; we have exactly two set-ups to consider, a 20th-level battle smith vs. a 1st-level hexblade/19th-level paladin. Race, ASIs, and paladin oath are variable, but only a few choices there are going to substantially impact the comparison. We have successfully handled far broader questions than this.

  • A label of “primarily opinion-based” here is completely antithetical to the site’s mission. The expertise we offer—the ability of our users to recognize what is significant and what is not—is one of the primary values that the Stack offers. To pretend all of that is purely a matter of preference and not something that experts can offer specific insight on is simply inaccurate, and were it taken as a precedent, would do substantial harm to the Stack’s ability to help querents.

A couple of precedents, found with a quick search:

There is no need for the querent to restrict things to some particular level; a good answer can go over how things change at various levels. There is no need for the querent to restrict things to some particular goal; a good answer can give an overview of what each is good at and what the relative value of those specialties is. There is no need for a dozen questions on the comparison, for different levels and with different goals in mind—a good overview is precisely what is requested and an entirely appropriate thing to seek here. The querent’s own answer is already a solid start to a real answer, though an expert should be able to improve upon it.

\$\endgroup\$
  • 13
    \$\begingroup\$ I don't have a good answer for why this question was closed, but your tone is at the very least not constructive. It can be very difficult to determine whether something can be answered satisfactorily within a proposed scope. That's why questions end up here on meta. Scope is not easy to determine. That's why borderline questions are brought to meta for discussion. You did the right thing bringing it here, but you could have done so without the bitterness. Also, your arguments would probably be better suited as an answer so that people can vote based on their merits if they agree with you. \$\endgroup\$ – David Coffron Nov 26 '19 at 20:12
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ @DavidCoffron There’s a reason for that, but nonetheless, fine, edited accordingly. \$\endgroup\$ – KRyan Nov 26 '19 at 20:17
  • 6
    \$\begingroup\$ “Another question closed unnecessarily, another question we need to drag into meta to save it.” I think this approach is unhelpful. The close-reopen cycle that leads to homeostasis is a deliberate feature, one that’s better than the alternatives, I think. It’s also a normal part of the process to bring more attention to a vote on meta, but the suggestion that community members are voting inappropriately, or that the normal non-failure states of the process are intolerable, is dismaying to see. \$\endgroup\$ – SevenSidedDie Nov 27 '19 at 15:54
12
\$\begingroup\$

The requests for clarification in the comments (now the chat) are entirely reasonable.

  1. Is this really a request to bake these two builds off at level 20, or is this a build that will be "grown through" over the course of a character's life (in which case lower level weaknesses should be taken into account), and is there any guarantee it'll reach level 20?

  2. What is the goal of the build - Nova damage? Battlefield control? Support? Healing? "Compare X vs Y" makes no sense without at least a basic statement of goal.

Encourage the OP to engage with those questions and edit the answer into their question so it can be reopened. They started to answer one in the chat/comments before frankly being disincentivized from improving their question by the scuffle over whether their question should be improved or not. If you help them improve their question it would be open again quickly.

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ Actually I was disincentivized by "Pros and cons of eldritch knight or arcane trickster for throwing-weapon battle smith multiclass" where a pro/con question was not immediately put on hold for being opinion based. That posters goal was throwing things and damage. But even if you didn't know that goal. The comparison would still stand. Clearly that doesn't belong on these forums so I made a post about how I would go about doing the work myself. \$\endgroup\$ – kent Nov 27 '19 at 0:05
  • 5
    \$\begingroup\$ The one that specifies both "The goal, overall, is combat capacity, but it doesn’t have to be straight DPS" (a goal) and "We are starting play at 12th level..." (level information)? Yeah, it's a clear question so it was never closed. \$\endgroup\$ – mxyzplk - SE stop being evil Nov 27 '19 at 0:16
  • \$\begingroup\$ that's disingenuous. I just mentioned votes to close for opinion. And you bring up the votes for close for being unclear. Had I said they want to be a tanky dps with support abilities. We go from 1-20. What are the pros cons of these two options. It wouldn't have changed anything. You still have to give an opinion. \$\endgroup\$ – kent Nov 27 '19 at 0:40
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Moreover. As @KRyan has pointed out I was looking for an overview. I am not the player. I didn't want to ask for specific advice about a single goal. Find out later that goal has changed. And then have the answer be worthless. \$\endgroup\$ – kent Nov 27 '19 at 0:48

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .