Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="thedungeondelver" data-source="post: 3257548" data-attributes="member: 34865">&quot;hopelessly&quot; - could you please be more patronizing?&nbsp; I can almost cut through it with a knife.&nbsp; Next time go for &quot;too thick to drip&quot;.&quot;Nostalgia&quot;.&nbsp; That's another one.&nbsp; I hear that term bandied about by post 1e gamers and I've reached the (correct) conclusion that the definition being used here is &quot;hey, you're playing and advocating an older system I don't like any more!&quot; It's never used in the positive - at best it's a little conversational condescension, at worst a thinly-veiled insultSixty-six.&nbsp; She could heal herself fully 2x a day.&nbsp; She was attended by her Handmaidens (remember them?&nbsp; you had to plow through them while she was gateing in all types of demons), she'd be using magic-user and cleric spells nearly at-will, psionically attacking and if all else failed she could simply will the PCs away or will herself away.Don't mistake a badly run monster for a badly designed monster.&nbsp; It isn't the module's fault you had a poor DM.....eeeeeeeexcept it doesn't.&nbsp; Name a current D&amp;D supplement that's sold two hundred thousand copies.&nbsp; At it's peak in the early 80's, D&amp;D enjoyed an audience of some four million players.&nbsp; What is it now, one point five?&nbsp; Maybe two with the wind at it's back?It has a diluted product base where the industry basically goes &quot;throw it to the wall, see what sticks!&quot; courtesy of OGL/d20.&quot;better&quot; is purely subjective.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="thedungeondelver, post: 3257548, member: 34865"] "hopelessly" - could you please be more patronizing? I can almost cut through it with a knife. Next time go for "too thick to drip". "Nostalgia". That's another one. I hear that term bandied about by post 1e gamers and I've reached the (correct) conclusion that the definition being used here is "hey, you're playing and advocating an older system I don't like any more!" It's never used in the positive - at best it's a little conversational condescension, at worst a thinly-veiled insult Sixty-six. She could heal herself fully 2x a day. She was attended by her Handmaidens (remember them? you had to plow through them while she was [i]gate[/i]ing in all types of demons), she'd be using magic-user and cleric spells nearly at-will, psionically attacking and if all else failed she could simply will the PCs away or will herself away. Don't mistake a badly run monster for a badly designed monster. It isn't the module's fault you had a poor DM. ....eeeeeeeexcept it doesn't. Name a current D&D supplement that's sold two hundred thousand copies. At it's peak in the early 80's, D&D enjoyed an audience of some four million players. What is it now, one point five? Maybe two with the wind at it's back? It has a diluted product base where the industry basically goes "throw it to the wall, see what sticks!" courtesy of OGL/d20. "better" is purely subjective. [/QUOTE]

Verification