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="The Sigil" data-source="post: 999524" data-attributes="member: 2013">I'd wager there probably is deep down somewhere.  We're all biased, of course.  Everything we write reflects our biases, some of us just hide it better than others.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> But I'm probably too close to the situation to see it.  I don't see myself as having a bias towards 3.5 over AU - I haven't seen either one in final form yet, so I can't say which one I prefer "mechanically."  I suppose I might have a "rooting interest" in 3.5 since I have pushed some products back to make sure they account for the changes in 3.5... though I don't know if that gives me a "negative rooting interest" because the impending release of 3.5 has forced me to delay them, and AU's release has not.  (In other words, I'm not sure whether I give WotC bonus points for "new material" or take off points for "making me push back releases").Perhaps someone will point it out to me - as I have said, I may be too close to see my own bias - but the only possible conflict I can see might be the "competition" between the Book of Eldritch Might II and the Enchiridion of Mystic Music as "bard books."  (Though I did write the EoMM after seeing the BoEM2 and thinking, "that wasn't what I thought should be done with the bard at all" so I don't think there was much direct competition - the EoMM came out well after the BoEM2, so I doubt there was ever much head-to-head competition).  Perhaps that has a bearing on how I see Monte (I don't think it does; I love his stuff - as sales records on RPGNow will indicate, but maybe I'm wrong), but I don't think so... I think he's an excellent writer and in some ways, perhaps I idolize him a bit.  In fact, as I mentioned elsewhere, AU is much higher on my "buying list" than 3.5e - so I don't think I have anything "personal" against Monte.I don't have a license to produce AU stuff (but I don't have a license to produce 3.5e stuff either - at least, no more than anyone else has under the OGL).In other words, I can't figure out why I might be biased against Monte any more than WotC - both are "competitors" though I suppose sales of my product are tied more into "d20" than "AU."  I may well be - but again, if so, I'm be too close to see it and would be happy to have someone point it out to me.I'll turn the question on you, Eric - does my review have merit and seem to rely upon fair argument, example, and logic to reach its conclusions?  Do its premises seem inherently biased?  If so, what bias am I exhibiting (I'm not asking this as a challenge; I'm genuinely curious to know what biases I have that I can't see because I'm "too close" to them to see them).--The Sigil</blockquote>

Verification