Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Felon" data-source="post: 1345977" data-attributes="member: 8158">They're not lamers because I disagree with them, as I'm fairly apathetic on the matter. They're lamers because they enjoy taking little pot-shots whenever the hint of an opportunity presents itself. They're just loaded for bear with snide remarks about elves and how much they suck and how much bias WotC has in favor of them. If people can't have a discussion about elves without wading through a bunch of elf-bashing running commentary, then that is lame. It'd also be lame if we couldn't have a discussion about elves without people gushing about how k3wl they are, but that doesn't happen on these boards.Yep, there's been lots of them. So whenever they add another, we get the whole list of them rattled off again. What's the big honkin' deal about offering a lot of optional subraces anyway? From what I've seen of them, they all offer pretty balanced racial packages, and have an appropriate level adjustment. The way you're able to list all of those subraces and PrC's off the top of your head...it's hard to argue that you're not loaded for bear  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Now listen to yourself, DJ. You're just lending validity to what I was saying before. There's no active pro-elf agenda. There's no pointy-eared conspiracy. If people like'em it's because they're graceful and magical and superficially appealing. Nothing game-upsetting about that.Right, how about we bring that up, because if you're going to elf-bash, there's no reason to have a sane perspective on things.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />  Seriously, when you go to the lengths of supporting your position by dredging up an outdated supplement written by a defunct company that's, what, maybe 10 or 12 years old, do you not see how that makes you look just a little irrational on the topic? Particularly when you refer to it in grandiose terms like "one of the most infamous 2e supplements ever". I mean, in what circle was it nicknamed "The Complete Book of Munchkins"? The elf-bashing community, most likely.</blockquote>

Verification