Rule of Three 20/6/11

[Zaran]

I found #1 to be redundant. They didn't have to waste one of the Rules of Three (which I have come to anticipate like wrecks in NASCAR) to answer a question answered by the day's article.

 

[Siberys]

It's just a typo, relax. It's not as if they're being coy about the issues with epic tier. If anything, they've been pretty up front about what they're thinking about the problem.

However, I did notice that their mention of "Zarash’ak" carries an oddly positioned apostrophe. Typo? Overuse of wierd naming conventions? Or, clear evidence that they intend to destroy the entire Ebberon campaigin setting by overwriting the source material with random punctuation?!!?

That's how Zarash'ak always been spelled.

Eberron, however, has only one B and two Rs.</peeve class="pet">

 

[Pentius]

That's how Zarash'ak always been spelled.

Eberron, however, has only one B and two Rs.</peeve class="pet">

Yes, long live the setting of Eb'erron.

 

[catsclaw227]

That's how Zarash'ak always been spelled.

Eberron, however, has only one B and two Rs.</peeve class="pet">

Ha! A spelling correction comment that contains a syntax error.

Attributes such as a class definition is placed in the tag start, no attributes are placed in an end tag. Even when you are just being cute.

<peeve class="pet">Eberron, however, has only one B and two Rs.</peeve>

 

[Herschel]

It's just a typo, relax. It's not as if they're being coy about the issues with epic tier. If anything, they've been pretty up front about what they're thinking about the problem.

However, I did notice that their mention of "Zarash’ak" carries an oddly positioned apostrophe. Typo? Overuse of wierd naming conventions? Or, clear evidence that they intend to destroy the entire Ebberon campaigin setting by overwriting the source material with random punctuation?!!?

DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM!
(must spread XP)