Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Felon" data-source="post: 3116740" data-attributes="member: 8158">Mm-kay, you don't want to go down that road. But in one Ravenloft thread after another you'll keep tossing out extreme remarks like "undead simply can't be scary without real level drain" or "Tomb of Moderately Not Nice Stuff" or "based on this one illustration I deem this book to be terrible", which you must realize (at some level) are stated in a patently refutable manner, and thus will be refuted.Of course someone's going to attest that there are other ways to make undead horrific than resorting to no-save no-defense permanent level-draining mook monsters. Of course folks will object to the implication that a dungeon's quality is linked to how certain the odds of a TPK are.  Of course rejecting an entire book on the basis of one picture is going to garnish a rebuttal. That's all very passive-aggressive.In each of these threads you're basically making a series of snipes--little wildly-exaggerated negative comments that you don't elaborate on sufficiently enough for anyone to get where you're coming from. Then when you're challenged to support your provocative remarks, you beg off like you don't to get into some heated debate.Sorry if I ruin your fun, but if you keep sniping, I'll gladly keep saying "OK, let's examine the basis of your arguement". At least as long as you're criticising stuff I think is of good quality.Case in point:You refer to it as an abomination, so you have strong feelings about how bad it is, but you in no way articulate what was wrong with it. It seems like a pretty faithful conversion, so what's the problem?</blockquote>

Verification