NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Justice and Rule" data-source="post: 9033618" data-attributes="member: 6778210"> <ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">This is attacking the idea that you would have to create a completely new combat system, which is hysterics: we are talking about changing a specific type of movement and adapting creatures that use that type of movement to new rules. Yet you were talking about how we are essentially changing the entire system. That is a completely overblown response. </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">But that is attacking your argumentation. You're not actually engaging with what I'm saying, you're creating whole strawmen about how this would change the entire system. That to me is "crying" and that's not a personal attack as much as a commentary on your argument. </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">It's to your question, which is inane. That is not attacking you, it's attacking your line of attack, which is bad. The whole "Do elephants and horses move in the same manner?" is inane because it has no bearing on the actual discussion at hand, but is meant to draw the entire thing off into a tangential argument about debating making a change in the first place. That debate was already settled when some of us chose to engage with the idea of changing flight in the first place.</li> </ol>You keep saying how you aren't making slippery slope arguments, but that entire question and focus on "Why not other ones?" is very much a slippery slope, even if you want to deny. We are focusing on flying because that's what we are focusing on. I don't need a meta-discussion on why this instead of other things because that is a different topic and if you want to engage on it, feel free to make it.However, given how you've wanted to draw this entire argument not into a discussion of how but into why despite me explaining very clearly my reasoning for why, I'm done with whatever discussion was here.</blockquote>

Verification