Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mark CMG" data-source="post: 5721791" data-attributes="member: 10479">The articles were meant to spur discussion about what the designers think based on what they write.&nbsp; Certainly, if it differs from what you believe they are thinking and writing, you have the option to either present a differing opinion or to try and discount what others believe.&nbsp; You might, however, want to reread that article to which Aberzanzorax linked.&nbsp; I'm not sure you quite understood how they feel. <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&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />Naturally, words are charged with meaning, it's why we have them.&nbsp; If, for instance, rather than using the unfortunately negative &quot;story burden&quot; he had said he realized they went too far in stripping context from creature descriptions and said they should re-examine the &quot;story importance&quot; of past descriptive text to bring back the &quot;essential elements&quot; rather than &quot;essential truths&quot; (I kinda let that one slide, but as long as we're still on the subject) it certainly would have had a much more positive tone.&nbsp; Hey, these guys get the big bucks to write articles to get us discussing their design of the next edition.&nbsp; It'd be a shame to disappoint them.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Mark CMG, post: 5721791, member: 10479"] The articles were meant to spur discussion about what the designers think based on what they write. Certainly, if it differs from what you believe they are thinking and writing, you have the option to either present a differing opinion or to try and discount what others believe. You might, however, want to reread that article to which Aberzanzorax linked. I'm not sure you quite understood [i]how they feel[/i]. ;) Naturally, words are charged with meaning, it's why we have them. If, for instance, rather than using the unfortunately negative "story burden" he had said he realized they went too far in stripping context from creature descriptions and said they should re-examine the "story importance" of past descriptive text to bring back the "essential elements" rather than "essential truths" (I kinda let that one slide, but as long as we're still on the subject) it certainly would have had a much more positive tone. Hey, these guys get the big bucks to write articles to get us discussing their design of the next edition. It'd be a shame to disappoint them. [/QUOTE]

Verification