Yes, but that diehard has a habit of doing that, like creating threads like this.
So I will continue to argue about this with him because he’s too liberal with the term.
How is it a low standard? If I said that viable builds are the ones that finished the campaign, then yes, it would be a low standard. If I said that viable builds were the ones that reached empowered monos, yes, that would be a low standard.
But from the start I’ve maintained that a viable build is the one that can do ALL content in the game. What more do you want?
If someone asks “What’s a viable build to play the game?”, the answer is “Almost all of them”.
If someone asks “What’s a viable build to be able to do everything in the game?”, the answer is “Almost all of them”.
If someone asks “What’s a viable build to reach the top of the arena?”, then they have restricted the term already and only the competitive ones should be considered.