Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Alzrius" data-source="post: 5777413" data-attributes="member: 8461">Much like your citation of his saying it was "perfect" didn't exist? You shouldn't say that someone else's assertions don't hold up when yours don't.You're again making the fatal (for your argument) mistake that someone your experience is some sort of truism. It's not. I've actually observed the play reports of other people in U_K's forums saying that you're wrong (because you are). It is not "almost impossible to get four players making characters that can adventure with each other" without a heavy handed DM; it was almost impossible for your players.You don't speak for everyone, or even anyone. Stop pretending you're revealing some sort of greater truth.You once again fail to realize that just because you experienced something doesn't make it universal. It's just how it was for your group; you really need to learn that that's not indicative of anything except how it was for your group.Come back when you've conducted an objective sampling of everybody and then you'll be able to talk about facts, rather than your opinion.You say this, and yet...This is exceptionally hypocritical considering that you were just referring me to other threads. I think before that, you should read the links I provided previously in that there's no such thing as "equal power," and that "balance" is a meaningless term.There's no need for evidence to the contrary, because you haven't presented any evidence of anything save for that your group makes broken builds. Problem players, not a problem game.This is an assertion that's not only nothing more than your opinion, it's also impossible to prove true, since you can't even define "roughly equivalent."See above. All you're saying is "I broke it so it's bad," rather than admitting that just because you broke something doesn't mean that it's inherently breakable.Wow. This is so wrong it's staggering to behold. You can't identify anything in an RPG that's an "absolute standard" for anything else. The fact that you don't realize that is more evidence that you don't know the difference between your personal experience and everyone else's.If you're talking about sub-epic material, then I've seen that too. It doesn't prove that 3.5 is broken, since other people have played 3.5 just fine. Ergo, your argument is invalid.See above; you're incapable of determining what's "likely" for everyone else.Wrong. He released a product that could conceivably be better; that doesn't make it unfinished. This is like saying that WotC owes you money because 3.0 was unfinished compared to 3.5. It's unforgivably arrogant, and flat-out wrong.You are owed nothing; not even an answer to your questions. You should be thankful for the fact that he does answer them (and with much more respect than you deserve, based on your conduct here).You're wrong. Again.Just because it refers to material in another book doesn't make it unfinished. WotC does that all the time with their books. Just because material was cut from a book before its release doesn't make it unfinished; that happens with a significant number of all books. Just because the art isn't all there doesn't make the book unfinished; it just means that you got all the art that was available at the time.Quite simply, your entire argument boils down to "I don't like it." The fact that you think that if you keep saying that over and over, you'll actually somehow make that anything other than your opinion, is sad. That you think that somehow you're owed something to quiet your tantrum is foolish.</blockquote>

Verification