Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Grover Cleaveland" data-source="post: 2655206" data-attributes="member: 34932">It's partly about that, and partly it has nothing to do with the designers or product. The whole &quot;what's crappy about Planescape&quot; part of the thread (which I partly began with my ill-advised &quot;why Erik Mona is not fit to sneer at us&quot; rant) was really its own entity, not tethered to the question of what would be in the product - people saw an opportunity to weigh in on their opinions on the subject and did so, because that's mainly what the Internet is about. This will always be true. &nbsp;The &quot;should stats for the demon princes be included&quot; part, on the other hand, was all about what decisions we thought the designers should make, although it too became more purely theoretical at various times. I don't even know what the whole argument I was having with Upper Krust was about, but it certainly had nothing to do with the book in question. I guess it started out that way for Krust, but I just joined in because it's a subject I like to talk about, not because I think I have any influence at all on what Mona and Jacobs decide to put in their book. Krust is always happy to defend his theories in great detail, so that helped keep the conversation going.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Grover Cleaveland, post: 2655206, member: 34932"] It's partly about that, and partly it has nothing to do with the designers or product. The whole "what's crappy about Planescape" part of the thread (which I partly began with my ill-advised "why Erik Mona is not fit to sneer at us" rant) was really its own entity, not tethered to the question of what would be in the product - people saw an opportunity to weigh in on their opinions on the subject and did so, because that's mainly what the Internet is about. [i]This will always be true[/i]. The "should stats for the demon princes be included" part, on the other hand, was all about what decisions we thought the designers should make, although it too became more purely theoretical at various times. I don't even know what the whole argument I was having with Upper Krust was about, but it certainly had nothing to do with the book in question. I guess it started out that way for Krust, but I just joined in because it's a subject I like to talk about, not because I think I have any influence at all on what Mona and Jacobs decide to put in their book. Krust is always happy to defend his theories in great detail, so that helped keep the conversation going. [/QUOTE]

Verification