Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="was" data-source="post: 6476595" data-attributes="member: 24488">..This board does not get many posts, that's why it's still up on the page.&nbsp; It helps to check the start date, the date posted on the top of the thread or the date on the top of the last post..&nbsp; There has been a lot of recent activity where newer members have resurrected dead threads to increase their post counts.&nbsp; Some up to 8 or 10 years old.&nbsp; It's generally considered impolite.&nbsp; ...You are reading far too much into this argument.&nbsp; It has nothing to do with 'twisting' a DM into doing anything.&nbsp; It's about players not being so enslaved to the RAW that they lack the courage to ask.&nbsp; It was asked during a period when discussions about strictly following the RAW, on both sides of the screen, where prevalent.&nbsp; I have been both a DM and a player, and IME creating unique character options is a good thing.&nbsp; ...Threads on player empower vs. DM fiat have been done to death over several editions.&nbsp; I'm really not feeling up to getting into that argument again....We'll have to disagree on whether or not the point had already been made.&nbsp; It's also generally a good idea to read an entire post before making a comment.&nbsp; Otherwise, it's like jumping into a conversation midstream....Finally, your are reading intent and motive into posts that simply were not there.&nbsp; If I state that I was not trying to be rude or offensive, I meant it.&nbsp; I do not use qualifiers as an excuse to be rude or offensive.&nbsp; If it comes across that way, than I apologize.&nbsp; ...Unlike many other boards out there, these boards are generally pretty civil.&nbsp; I'm not sure what your past experiences are, but I generally give people here the benefit of the doubt before assuming that they are intentionally trying to be nasty.&nbsp; Though it is hard at times. ...I have left other boards due to the 'quality' of the conversations.&nbsp; It does tend to leave one with the &quot;this guy is personally attacking me so I am going to fry him&quot; state of mind.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="was, post: 6476595, member: 24488"] ..This board does not get many posts, that's why it's still up on the page. It helps to check the start date, the date posted on the top of the thread or the date on the top of the last post.. There has been a lot of recent activity where newer members have resurrected dead threads to increase their post counts. Some up to 8 or 10 years old. It's generally considered impolite. ...You are reading far too much into this argument. It has nothing to do with 'twisting' a DM into doing anything. It's about players not being so enslaved to the RAW that they lack the courage to ask. It was asked during a period when discussions about strictly following the RAW, on both sides of the screen, where prevalent. I have been both a DM and a player, and IME creating unique character options is a good thing. ...Threads on player empower vs. DM fiat have been done to death over several editions. I'm really not feeling up to getting into that argument again. ...We'll have to disagree on whether or not the point had already been made. It's also generally a good idea to read an entire post before making a comment. Otherwise, it's like jumping into a conversation midstream. ...Finally, your are reading intent and motive into posts that simply were not there. If I state that I was not trying to be rude or offensive, I meant it. I do not use qualifiers as an excuse to be rude or offensive. If it comes across that way, than I apologize. ...Unlike many other boards out there, these boards are generally pretty civil. I'm not sure what your past experiences are, but I generally give people here the benefit of the doubt before assuming that they are intentionally trying to be nasty. Though it is hard at times. ...I have left other boards due to the 'quality' of the conversations. It does tend to leave one with the "this guy is personally attacking me so I am going to fry him" state of mind. [/QUOTE]

Verification