Search results

Neutral was always kind of a wonky alignment. There's "neutral" (i.e. unaligned) people who really don't care about the world in black/white terms. They are mostly self-interested, but really just trying to get by, not cause pain to others. Then there's NEUTRAL (i.e. like a druid) who feels...

It entertaining enough, and there's some good acting there. Cain and Glitch are fine. DG's acting, however, is horrible. She manages to pull me out of the scene half the time with her mailed-in dialog. Munchkin: "We're going to flay you alive!" DG: "Ho hum. You're out of your tiny minds..."

Okay, finished the game, and my final view is a little less favorable than my starting impression. The side missions were all way too similar, so at some point I just stopped doing them. Without the side missions, I think I finished the game in about 20 hours of play. Which seems way too short...

Everybody likes honesty. That said, some of the most classic ENWorld posts have been completely insincere. For example: 1) The Bugaboo classics (I won't spoil them here) 2) billdoor's goat sacrifice post. 3) The April Fool's series Sure, there's a fine line between trolling/misinformation and...

Morrus, I think this suggests a change in policy. The three golden rules via the rules page (which I have read): (1) Keep it civil, (2) Keep it clean, and (3) Keep it on topic. Elaboration of "Keep it civil": Don't engage in personal attacks, name-calling, or blanket generalizations in your...

Accurate and a good summary. Though mischaracterization would be rather uncivil, if it were to occur.

Well, I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree (and no, I don't need to be shown the door). I feel there is a place for harsh critique of published material (or even published previews of published material). I won't take up any more time on this thread about it though.

Ah, right. I forgot about the taboo subjects addendum. I've got no problem with that. May I amend to say that as long as the subject is D&D, civility should be the dividing line?

I would personally recommend not placing too much credibility in an anonymous message board poster anyways. The point of the post is that if there is a line which determines whether a post is good or bad: civility is it. Not everything else which may or may not annoy you about a poster. That...

I'm not a journalist. Who said I was trying to be impartial? My posts can be nice and helpful. They can also be unfair or overly-filled with attitude. Why exactly is "attitude" a problem? Because people get offended by attitude? Too bad. I'm not spewing personal insults, I'm making a...

Agreed. Morrus is within his rights to do as he wishes with this site, and he can bring down that ban hammer like John Henry if he likes. Rarely a good idea though. Besides, what exactly am I doing or proposing that you guys consider ban-worthy? Disagreeing with other posters? Pointing out...

I've been a poster on these boards virtually since they started, and I've never been banned (mildly warned once or twice, sure). The moderators can tell me to leave if they like, but it's not really your place to say. Morrus owns the site. He (or his designated authorities) can write the...

BTW, claiming that people are saying that Wizards is trying to create a failed product is probably also hyperbole.

That is actually the one real problem with "civility" as a term. I respect that the makers of the product we use are posters on this board, and personal attacks against them are bad. But their products and the decisions made about those products? That should be open for downright evisceration...

I agree with civility. I do not agree with various other aspects of face-to-face conversation. For example: - Calmness - Rational thought - Understanding - Sincerity I support a poster's right to be a completely unhinged, lying, self-absorbed, drama queen. As long as they're civil.

There's no requirement for people to give WotC the benefit of the doubt. People will believe what they choose with the evidence they've seen to date. It's not like we're completely ignorant of some of the changes that 4e is proposing. There's nothing wrong with disagreeing with those changes...

Hm. I feel partly responsible for this snarkburst due to my open letter thread. But that said, I want to say something about some of these suggestions. Suggestion: "Don't say anything that you wouldn't say if you were face-to-face." Nonsense. I don't post to messageboards to be the boring...

That's okay. I can be convinced otherwise.

Hmmm... I'm not even sure I consider that word profanity. Other than in perhaps a more ancient meaning of the word "profanity". My bad, I guess. It wasn't my intention to escape any filters with my post though. Then again, "gosh darn it" sure is a pretty lame replacement. I can edit the...

I agree to simply stop listening to him, since he is clearly a man of wrong opinions.