Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="happyhermit" data-source="post: 7629094" data-attributes="member: 6834463">Sure, and you can also say; "I hate this, and I think having the game is better without it." without making you a terrible person or even worse... dare I say it, someone who was on the non-4e side of the edition war (hive of wretched scum and villany we all must swear they were). You can just... not like something, and believe the game is better off without it, it really doesn't make you a bad person just because that thing came from a particular edition.Which is similar to many arguments made about 5e's initial release strategy and anti-bloat ideas "What does it matter if there is a wall of rules and settings books, just buy what you want." Truth is, it does matter. Making things more explicitly optional can help a lot, but adding more stuff is not purely a positive thing. I can think of many thematic/flavour stuff that people would argue the game is better off without ie; Book of Erotic Fantasy, rape monsters, Book of Colonialism and Slavery, Justin Bieber's guide to Bards. I may or may not agree with them, but simply arguing that the game is better off without publishing a particular official product doesn't make them bad people (or edition warriors because Bieber was signed at the same time 4e was coming out). I can hear it already; "Oh, heavens me, how dare that dirty edition warrior compare Warlords with Bieber, off with his head!" they are just examples of things a person might not want in the game.You've more or less (AFAIR) argued that while 4e fans may in fact lash out at things that fans of other editions don't, it's understandable given what they have gone through and thus people shouldn't say things that might be construed by them as edition warring.Seriously? You don't know how the same thing can be presented respectfully or disrespectfully unless lying is involved? In a couple of posts you manage to refer to me as "He" (I guess, you never responded to my request at clarification), informed me of what conversations I was actually interested in, implied that I suggested you were lying, chose to use "lame" instead of underpowered or a million other less emotionally charged words, etc. I could give examples of how things can be said disrespectfully, but there isn't a lot of point is there?Someone put you on their ignore list, many people have issues with the way that works on forums, but it doesn't correlate to what has been happening here. Judging from your posts are you even sure it was due to your views and not a personality conflict? BTW, Tony Vargas and I have both "ignored" the other at one time or another, I wasn't censoring his views (and I doubt that's what he was trying to do), I was just too annoyed (still annoyed just a wee bit less at the moment, or maybe just as annoyed but my threshold is higher, who knows <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue    :p"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" />).</blockquote>

Verification