imurphy943
First Post
[MENTION=55066]Dice4Hire[/MENTION]
Next forums are even worse, and probably listened to more. The problem, I feel, is that with the complexity of the game, Wizards can't possibly be expected to fit both sides of any given argument in as optional rules (the best solution), so one side is going to get shafted. People talking about the game aren't talking about adding anything, they're talking about removing things or changing things. They get really negative to the point that if you want to point out anything against the general opinion you get insulted, if you don't get a flame war.
On an unrelated note, an rpg.net moderator closed the thread before any responses came in, for "blatant edition warring rhetoric"
and being started in the wrong forum.
Next forums are even worse, and probably listened to more. The problem, I feel, is that with the complexity of the game, Wizards can't possibly be expected to fit both sides of any given argument in as optional rules (the best solution), so one side is going to get shafted. People talking about the game aren't talking about adding anything, they're talking about removing things or changing things. They get really negative to the point that if you want to point out anything against the general opinion you get insulted, if you don't get a flame war.
On an unrelated note, an rpg.net moderator closed the thread before any responses came in, for "blatant edition warring rhetoric"
