Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="tjasamcarl" data-source="post: 319565" data-attributes="member: 6007">Not quite..Wow..you 'sent me packing' with the ELH debate? From what i can recall, your argument was blatantly sentimental, not relying on any critique of the rules, which were far and away the most valued valued aspect of most GAMING supplements, and instead relying on some foggy aesthetic bias which you failed to reasonably elaborate on. And comparing it to the Manual of the Planes, which was more a sourcebook than a rules supp, and saying because it they did not support the same thing and therefore the ELH failed is just a fallacy; you are critiqing it based upon what it is not as oppossed to what it is, but then, many of the more self-absorbed dms tend to gripe when any aspect of a product fails to meet their particular expectations..You were making a number of statements before the ELH was released conscerning the 'mistake' Wotc was making in creating such a weighty supp. Your assumptions seemed to be that at such levels the rules encouraged 'munchkinism', another blatantly irrational argument that i hear all to often on these and other boards.'All it could have been?' It was all it needed to be, supporting that aspect of the rpg which everyone at the table relys upon, the rules..Pathetic.BTW, i was commenting on FDP Mikes assertion that d20 publishers had 'caught up' to Wotc generally, not just adventures.</blockquote>