Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Man in the Funny Hat" data-source="post: 3725803" data-attributes="member: 32740">Let it be known that I don't have a problem with Forgotten Realms being set as the first setting to be released for 4E.&nbsp; I don't have a problem (as such) with Greyhawk being ignored in favor of FR, Eberron, whatever.&nbsp; BUT...Can we then please see the end of that silliness of using Greyhawk as the &quot;default example&quot; in the Core Rules when nobody could ever buy and use the setting for it as they could with FR, Eberron, etc?&nbsp; In particular the use of Greyhawk deities for clerics.If you're gonna ignore Greyhawk or leave it to someone else to handle, then by god ignore it, or leave it for someone else to handle.&nbsp; Get it out of the Core Rules or USE IT in a way that actually gives that setting more than just a useless nod.&nbsp; This is a matter of what makes sense to use in the Core Rules, not a matter of which setting hasn't gotten its propers.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Man in the Funny Hat, post: 3725803, member: 32740"] Let it be known that I don't have a problem with Forgotten Realms being set as the first setting to be released for 4E. I don't have a problem (as such) with Greyhawk being ignored in favor of FR, Eberron, whatever. BUT... Can we then [I]please[/I] see the end of that silliness of using Greyhawk as the "default example" in the Core Rules when nobody could ever buy and use the setting for it as they could with FR, Eberron, etc? In particular the use of Greyhawk deities for clerics. If you're gonna ignore Greyhawk or leave it to someone else to handle, then by god [U]ignore[/U] it, or [U]leave it for someone else[/U] to handle. Get it out of the Core Rules or USE IT in a way that actually gives that setting more than just a useless nod. This is a matter of what makes sense to use in the Core Rules, not a matter of which setting hasn't gotten its propers. [/QUOTE]

Verification