Classes with diff. power schedules drawing from same list

General questions, debates, and rants about RPGs

Moderator: Moderators

CaptPike
Apprentice
Posts: 98
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2015 7:23 am

Post by CaptPike »

erik wrote:Goddamn it, I know I was stupid for clicking to read your post. I got sucked back in since it was a different thread than the 4e sales, but you're the exact same kind of dishonestly-stupid here as there.

"Why didn't they spell out the problems"? They did. In that very fucking text block that has already been quoted.
THESE ARE FUCKING PROBLEMS wrote:We have too many powers that are too similar. Listing powers under specific classes might have helped organize the Player's Handbook for the specific task of character creation, but it launched us on a design and development path where we created many similar powers whose only substantive difference is the class those powers appear under. If I told you "I'm thinking of a 2[W] power that dazes for 1 round—which class does that power belong to?" you couldn't begin to guess. Almost anybody might have that power.

In earlier editions, some spells were allowed to appear on multiple class lists. We considered this a moderate nuisance in 3rd Edition, because it was strange that you couldn't describe hold person as a 2nd-level spell—for the wizard, it wasn't. I have belatedly come to realize that overlapping spell lists are a good thing, because they give spells like hold person and dispel magic unique identities in the game. When I play 4e, I don't recognize most of the powers that my fellow players are using, and that's a shame. In retrospect, I wish we'd just created a Powers Appendix of iconic, diverse effects (including martial powers, of course), and granted each class access to different subsets of those powers. The game would be better with a smaller number of iconic and memorable powers even if classes overlapped a bit more.
It's not an argument from authority. It doesn't matter that the people are not personally known to you. The argument is laid out right there in english words for all to see. Even the people who screwed up 4e realized that they screwed up and one of them explained why.
I responded to their argument, I just did not assume they were right because of what is under their name tag.

yes he has a good point, no it is not good enough to justify taking 90% of what makes a class a class and giving it to other classes.

Some shared spells? sure I can see that working, but not most unless you have powerful enough class features that define what classes do more then spells.

EDIT: my point was the who said the argument does not matter, that his logic was not enough and it does not matter who said it. If he had information I do not he should have said that.
Last edited by CaptPike on Thu Apr 23, 2015 3:07 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
deaddmwalking
Prince
Posts: 3636
Joined: Mon May 21, 2012 11:33 am

Post by deaddmwalking »

CaptPike wrote:
deaddmwalking wrote:I feel bad responding to two of your posts one after the other, but I feel this needs to be said.
You having data only helps if either you share it or I trust you to use it well and not have any reason to lie or mislead. Neither of those is the case here.
My having data only helps whom if I share it or you trust me? If I claim to have data and I refuse to share it, you might have a point. On the other hand, if the data has been shared and you don't trust it, you should probably explain why. In good scientific fashion, the data has been made available for you to review. But let's talk about the larger point. You don't understand sampling. For all your claims to 'logic' you're being an idiot.

Since you brought this up before, imagine that I have a limited data set of temperatures in Texas from June to the end of November. Let's say further that over that time, the temperature dropped on average 1/4 of a degree per day. Over 180 days, the temperature has fallen 45 degrees. The data (while limited) is alarming. If this pace continues, we'll be dealing with a solidly frozen state before another six months passes.

The data indicates the temperature is falling. If I understand the seasonality I can argue that the data doesn't show that the temperature will reverse, but that it will. But what I can't do is claim that the data actually shows the temperature was rising.

The data with 4e across the board indicates a failure. For myself, I don't care. It wouldn't matter to me if 4th edition were the most popular edition and everyone I knew played it or if (as it appears) it was one of the least popular editions and I know more people playing AD&D than 4th. I keep using the term 'failure' as if we agreed on what it means. You can't say I 'don't have data' for 4e's failure if you allow me to define failure the way I like.

4th edition is a failure to me because it drove me from a regular purchaser of gaming books into a non-purchaser (ie, drove me from the market). I bought some Pathfinder immediately after the shift, but ultimately decided that it didn't do what I wanted. There are problems with 3.x - believe me, I KNOW the problems. I would have liked a 4th edition that actually addressed those problems, but that's not what we got. And Pathfinder didn't do it, either. So to me, both were a 'failure' because they failed to build on what 3x got right and address the things it got wrong.
CaptPike wrote: If his reasons were good, I would have listened just like if some random
poster had responded with it.
You might have responded the same, but I seriously doubt you'd have listened.
CaptPike wrote:
I can understand why he said it, there ARE advantages to having overlap between classes but unless you make class features way more important then they were in 3e or 4e then powers are what defines classes so they need to be different (for the most most part) if you want classes to be different.
Interestingly, a large number of people feel that the powers in 4e are 'too similar' between classes. Calling two powers that do the exact same thing different names doesn't actually make them different. By your 'logic', 4e, even with different power lists, classes were not sufficiently differentiated because they largely had the same powers with different names. A rose by any other name...
CaptPike wrote: when have I ever said that my feels should matter to you? I have said them because someone asked me or because I was needed an example.
Who asked you? I mean, seriously. You're a new poster here. Who summoned you and said they wanted your opinion?

I think it's fine that you came uninvited. I did, too. The reason to have a forum like this is to discuss ideas and best practices - to expose yourself to other points of view and perhaps improve your own. To do this, you have to be willing to put out your viewpoint and defend it. Your 'feelings', if they 'only matter to you' don't need to be shared. Your expressing them implicitly claims value for them.
CaptPike wrote: Will you stop lying about you knowing for sure, with no doubt that 4e failed? if you just said "I think 4e failed" I would not care, even if you said "4e failed (but I do not know for sure because large chunks of data are missing)" that would also be ok. But you all are claiming fasts you can not possbily have and are putting down something I love in the process for no reason.


And why should you care if I say 'I know 4e failed'? Does it cause you physical pain? I have 'reasons' for claiming to 'know'. You don't think my 'reasons' are sufficient to make the claim. But you are not the judge who gets to determine whether my ideas are sufficiently supported by data to make a claim. Nor are you the judge who gets to determine if I am right after I present that information to you. I don't care to convince you - I don't even care if 4e is a failure or not. If you think that I am spreading misinformation you could try to convince me that my data is unsound (preferably by providing contrary evidence) but you have refused to do that. Instead, you insist that unless you have 'perfect knowledge' you cannot make a claim. I 'know' that the war of 1812 ended in 1814, but I don't have 'perfect knowledge'. Do you know that there was a Japanese soldier that didn't surrender until 1974. Does that mean the war continued past 1945? Your claim that '4e was successful' is like claiming 'the war isn't over' in 1970 and that 'Japan could still win'.

Tellingly, whether 4e was or was not a success is simply a matter of historical curiosity - 4th edition has been relegated to the dustbin of history.
CaptPike wrote: I know that but does that let them understand the words on the PHB better then me? does it let them see problems with it I do not see? if so why did they not spell them out?

I trust facts, I trust logic, I do NOT trust anyone who wants me to trust them for no reason other then what they do.
Can you imagine a reality in which some people understand something better than you? Can you imagine being blind to a problem? If not, there's no reason for anyone to trust anything you say. I'm not saying you shouldn't say anything (but I can say the world would likely be a better place), but you have to accept that the same reasons other people might be wrong apply equally to you. If you want to challenge a consensus view, you need to be prepared for challenges. There are times when the majority are wrong. But if you believe that to be the case, present evidence. If your feeling is different, but every feeling is equally valid, why argue? Just because you feel demeaned if every statement is not prefaced with 'Based on the information I have at hand, my feeling is'. Can you even imagine that world?

Based on the information I have at hand, my feeling is that lunch would be a good idea. Based on the information I have at hand, my feeling is that Mexican food would be ideal. Based on the information I have at hand, my feeling is that we should avoid 'Dirty Sanchez's Mexican Restaurant'. Based on the information I have at hand, my feeling is that name may refer to a sexual act, which, based on the information I have at hand make me feel that we're likely to suffer an illness if we eat there.

I much prefer 'let's get Mexican but let's go to a place with an 'A' rating from the health inspector.

Maybe the health inspector has an agenda. I don't know him. But without evidence to the contrary, it is generally safe to believe the data you have. If you suspect it, you should generate your own data set for evaluation. So, feel free. Show us where 4e succeeded if it matters that much to you.

CaptPike wrote:
EDIT: my point was the who said the argument does not matter, that his logic was not enough and it does not matter who said it. If he had information I do not he should have said that.
People don't have to reveal all of the information they use to make a declaration. Nor do they have to assume what knowledge you have access to. If I say 'Iraq is located in the Middle East', I likely assume that you can easily verify that information. It doesn't matter if I'm a former Iraqi dictator living under an assumed name in Switzerland or if I'm a 2nd grade student at Washington Elementary with access to a globe. If you don't believe the claim, the facts may become relevant. There are all kinds of ways you can challenge an assertion.

You don't think that 'changing the powers' would have fixed 4th edition. I agree. The reason I agree, though, is very different. 4e was a pile of fail so hard that nothing could have fixed it. (Again, I may be willing to amend my statement if we agree of a definition of 'failure' - in this case, I have based it entirely on not having an out-of-combat action resolution system which seems a critical function for any role-playing game.
User avatar
angelfromanotherpin
Overlord
Posts: 9745
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by angelfromanotherpin »

Please stop wasting text on this guy. If you have to speak to or about him, you should at most use dismissive or insulting memes.

Image Image
MGuy
Prince
Posts: 4795
Joined: Tue Jul 21, 2009 5:18 am
Location: Indiana

Post by MGuy »

Yea, text walls are meaningless to this guy. I said it before, I'll say it again: He's already given the game away. Add to that the fact that this guy has a ban history it's like talking to silva in full shill mode.
The first rule of Fatclub. Don't Talk about Fatclub..
If you want a game modded right you have to mod it yourself.
hyzmarca
Prince
Posts: 3909
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2011 10:07 pm

Post by hyzmarca »

erik wrote:Except that kind of 4th-wall-breaking pisses people off (and rightfully so).
You can probably make the setting more interesting by integrating it with fluff. All magic is powered by the interaction of combat auras generated by those with killing intent. Therefore, you can only use magic during a fight to the death.

But you don't have to be personally engaged in combat, so Wizard Towers have giant gladiator arenas that constantly need fresh recruits

You can potentially get around such restrictions by hauling slave around with you and forcing them to fight, but it's logistically problematic, so most wizards don't leave their fortresses very often.
User avatar
Chamomile
Prince
Posts: 4632
Joined: Tue May 03, 2011 10:45 am

Post by Chamomile »

Do you guys not remember the shadzar debates? This is what deaddm does. He's finally found another punching bag to wail on. It kind of makes me happy for him.
DSMatticus
King
Posts: 5271
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 5:32 am

Post by DSMatticus »

Hah. The Bill one actually made me grin. I hadn't seen that specific one before.
User avatar
deaddmwalking
Prince
Posts: 3636
Joined: Mon May 21, 2012 11:33 am

Post by deaddmwalking »

Chamomile wrote:Do you guys not remember the shadzar debates? This is what deaddm does. He's finally found another punching bag to wail on. It kind of makes me happy for him.
There's a part of me that does enjoy it. And I just happened to have a little extra time since my in-laws are visiting so I'm taking vacation days. But there's also a part of me that feels dirty afterward. It'd be like beating up 2nd graders - I'd feel like Godzilla or King Kong - a powerful giant, but also a monster.

But if CaptPike isn't just a troll, maybe it's not totally worthless. I'll just have to see what he comes back with. But if it's the same stuff, I won't respond. One nice thing is that as I've grown older, I care less about what strangers think of me personally. Like when someone accuses me of being a neckbeard living in my mom's basement and I recognize both how desperate they are to believe that I'm a terrible person but also how wrong they are. As it happens, I own my own home, I'm happily married and I'm expecting my 3rd child. Gaming happens to be a hobby I enjoy that I don't get nearly as much time with as I used to/would like to, but it's mostly just a hobby.

CaptPike is really more like Shitmuffin - trying to control what you are or are not permitted to say and simultaneously setting himself as the arbiter of what does or does not qualify as 'feel/think/know'. The big difference is that Shitmuffin was at least willing to point to 'evidence', it was just 800+ hours of unsorted and largely irrelevant information. This isn't something I'm going to say lightly, but CaptPike is below Zak S as far as my esteem. But, on the other hand, I expect that CaptPike is much younger and feels that any attack on anything he likes is simultaneously an attack on him personally. I do know that it isn't worth engaging with CaptPike. I guess I'll just take it as a 'guilty pleasure'.
Gnorman
Apprentice
Posts: 99
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2013 2:38 am

Post by Gnorman »

Noooooo you summoned HIM whyyyy
Last edited by Gnorman on Thu Apr 23, 2015 7:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
schpeelah
Knight-Baron
Posts: 509
Joined: Sun Jun 08, 2008 7:38 pm

Post by schpeelah »

Gnorman wrote:Noooooo you summoned HIM whyyyy
Don't worry, we're inoculated. Maxus put "Zak S, Zak Smith, Dndwithpornstars, Zak Sabbath. He is a terrible person and a hack at writing and art. His cultural contributions are less than Justin Bieber's, and he's a shitmuffin. Go go gadget Googlebomb!" in his sig to drown his alerts in noise.
User avatar
Kaelik
ArchDemon of Rage
Posts: 14838
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Kaelik »

schpeelah wrote:
Gnorman wrote:Noooooo you summoned HIM whyyyy
Don't worry, we're inoculated. Maxus put "Zak S, Zak Smith, Dndwithpornstars, Zak Sabbath. He is a terrible person and a hack at writing and art. His cultural contributions are less than Justin Bieber's, and he's a shitmuffin. Go go gadget Googlebomb!" in his sig to drown his alerts in noise.
Doesn't mean he doesn't just manually read this forum looking for a chance to jump in and call everyone liars.
DSMatticus wrote:Kaelik gonna kaelik. Whatcha gonna do?
The U.S. isn't a democracy and if you think it is, you are a rube.

That's libertarians for you - anarchists who want police protection from their slaves.
CaptPike
Apprentice
Posts: 98
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2015 7:23 am

Post by CaptPike »

I can understand why he said it, there ARE advantages to having overlap between classes but unless you make class features way more important then they were in 3e or 4e then powers are what defines classes so they need to be different (for the most most part) if you want classes to be different.
deaddmwalking wrote: Interestingly, a large number of people feel that the powers in 4e are 'too similar' between classes. Calling two powers that do the exact same thing different names doesn't actually make them different. By your 'logic', 4e, even with different power lists, classes were not sufficiently differentiated because they largely had the same powers with different names. A rose by any other name...
first feelings NEVER MATTER, the reasons they felt like this might matter, but if all I know is someones feelings it helps not at all.

objecting to 4e because the powers were to similar but not objecting to 3e for the same reason is not rational, unlike the reverse. Not to mention why would the disction even matter between a game with 1/3 or so overlap in powers, and a game with no overlap but with alot of powers that were almost the same? the result is the same in either case.



deaddmwalking wrote: And why should you care if I say 'I know 4e failed'? Does it cause you physical pain? I have 'reasons' for claiming to 'know'. You don't think my 'reasons' are sufficient to make the claim. But you are not the judge who gets to determine whether my ideas are sufficiently supported by data to make a claim. Nor are you the judge who gets to determine if I am right after I present that information to you. I don't care to convince you - I don't even care if 4e is a failure or not. If you think that I am spreading misinformation you could try to convince me that my data is unsound (preferably by providing contrary evidence) but you have refused to do that. Instead, you insist that unless you have 'perfect knowledge' you cannot make a claim. I 'know' that the war of 1812 ended in 1814, but I don't have 'perfect knowledge'. Do you know that there was a Japanese soldier that didn't surrender until 1974. Does that mean the war continued past 1945? Your claim that '4e was successful' is like claiming 'the war isn't over' in 1970 and that 'Japan could still win'.

Tellingly, whether 4e was or was not a success is simply a matter of historical curiosity - 4th edition has been relegated to the dustbin of history.
You personal I do not care, but when you post it you perpetuate a lie, no different if I came across an anti-vaxer.

again say that you THINK It failed, and that is not a lie, say that it failed (but you are not 100% sure) that is also not a lie.


deaddmwalking wrote:
Can you imagine a reality in which some people understand something better than you? Can you imagine being blind to a problem? If not, there's no reason for anyone to trust anything you say. I'm not saying you shouldn't say anything (but I can say the world would likely be a better place), but you have to accept that the same reasons other people might be wrong apply equally to you. If you want to challenge a consensus view, you need to be prepared for challenges. There are times when the majority are wrong. But if you believe that to be the case, present evidence. If your feeling is different, but every feeling is equally valid, why argue? Just because you feel demeaned if every statement is not prefaced with 'Based on the information I have at hand, my feeling is'. Can you even imagine that world?

Based on the information I have at hand, my feeling is that lunch would be a good idea. Based on the information I have at hand, my feeling is that Mexican food would be ideal. Based on the information I have at hand, my feeling is that we should avoid 'Dirty Sanchez's Mexican Restaurant'. Based on the information I have at hand, my feeling is that name may refer to a sexual act, which, based on the information I have at hand make me feel that we're likely to suffer an illness if we eat there.

I much prefer 'let's get Mexican but let's go to a place with an 'A' rating from the health inspector.

Maybe the health inspector has an agenda. I don't know him. But without evidence to the contrary, it is generally safe to believe the data you have. If you suspect it, you should generate your own data set for evaluation. So, feel free. Show us where 4e succeeded if it matters that much to you.
First if you only have a feeling on something you should keep your mouth shut because it is just a feeling and they are never important to anyone but you.

if you KNOW something is true you SHOULD say it is true, but if you do not you should say so otherwise no one can trust anything you say because you might have 10% confidence that what you said is true, or you might have 99% who can say?

as I have said many many times before it succeeded on the amazon best seller list, yes that is enough data to KNOW if it succeeded overall but it is enough to cause doubt as to the 3e fan line of "of course 4e failed, duh"



deaddmwalking wrote: People don't have to reveal all of the information they use to make a declaration. Nor do they have to assume what knowledge you have access to. If I say 'Iraq is located in the Middle East', I likely assume that you can easily verify that information. It doesn't matter if I'm a former Iraqi dictator living under an assumed name in Switzerland or if I'm a 2nd grade student at Washington Elementary with access to a globe. If you don't believe the claim, the facts may become relevant. There are all kinds of ways you can challenge an assertion.

You don't think that 'changing the powers' would have fixed 4th edition. I agree. The reason I agree, though, is very different. 4e was a pile of fail so hard that nothing could have fixed it. (Again, I may be willing to amend my statement if we agree of a definition of 'failure' - in this case, I have based it entirely on not having an out-of-combat action resolution system which seems a critical function for any role-playing game.
they do if they want me to trust that data. well either that or establish that they have good data, are trustworthy and competent. otherwise I can simply go off their logic and reasoning.

Even going by your own metric of the out of combat problem (and I agree it was a problem but hardly an unfixable one) that only applies to casters, non-casters are at worst in the same boat. Its not like a lv10 fighter in 3e had stuff he could do outside combat short of the leadership feat to order other more capable people to do stuff.

And again I must ask if you have more data then me that you know, beyond any and all reasonable doubt, that 4e failed or are you simply puling stuff out of your ass again?
Last edited by CaptPike on Fri Apr 24, 2015 12:53 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Maxus
Overlord
Posts: 7645
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Maxus »

schpeelah wrote:
Gnorman wrote:Noooooo you summoned HIM whyyyy
Don't worry, we're inoculated. Maxus put "Zak S, Zak Smith, Dndwithpornstars, Zak Sabbath. He is a terrible person and a hack at writing and art. His cultural contributions are less than Justin Bieber's, and he's a shitmuffin. Go go gadget Googlebomb!" in his sig to drown his alerts in noise.
I have no idea if it works or not, but I like to think it does.
Last edited by Maxus on Fri Apr 24, 2015 1:34 am, edited 1 time in total.
He jumps like a damned dragoon, and charges into battle fighting rather insane monsters with little more than his bare hands and rather nasty spell effects conjured up solely through knowledge and the local plantlife. He unerringly knows where his goal lies, he breathes underwater and is untroubled by space travel, seems to have no limits to his actual endurance and favors killing his enemies by driving both boots square into their skull. His agility is unmatched, and his strength legendary, able to fling about a turtle shell big enough to contain a man with enough force to barrel down a near endless path of unfortunates.

--The horror of Mario

Zak S, Zak Smith, Dndwithpornstars, Zak Sabbath. He is a terrible person and a hack at writing and art. His cultural contributions are less than Justin Bieber's, and he's a shitmuffin. Go go gadget Googlebomb!
User avatar
Mistborn
Duke
Posts: 1477
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2012 7:55 pm
Location: Elendel, Scadrial

Post by Mistborn »

Dude what the fuck. 4e failed, it failed in the eyes of the very company that produced it. We know this because WotC canceled the fucking gameline in record time in favor of a new edition that jettisoned 4e's supposed "innovations". That edition also sucks but that's neither here nor there.

I still can't quite belive that you're for real here. You're here to claim success for a game that was declared a failure by the very company that produced it. Seriously dude your war fucking ended stop hiding out in the jungles of the Philippines.
CaptPike
Apprentice
Posts: 98
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2015 7:23 am

Post by CaptPike »

Lord Mistborn wrote:Dude what the fuck. 4e failed, it failed in the eyes of the very company that produced it. We know this because WotC canceled the fucking gameline in record time in favor of a new edition that jettisoned 4e's supposed "innovations". That edition also sucks but that's neither here nor there.

I still can't quite belive that you're for real here. You're here to claim success for a game that was declared a failure by the very company that produced it. Seriously dude your war fucking ended stop hiding out in the jungles of the Philippines.
first awesome reference, even if it does not apply here

Second I am claiming that we do not KNOW how well it did because we do not. We know how Wotc acted, but that can mean any one of several things. I do not believe that companies are perfect, do you?

And of course even if I were to accept the idea that 4e failed..that does not mean that it would have succeeded if it was 3.75 like everyone around here wants. It could have turned out worse because of the large number of people who wanted something new.
User avatar
deaddmwalking
Prince
Posts: 3636
Joined: Mon May 21, 2012 11:33 am

Post by deaddmwalking »

CaptPike wrote: And of course even if I were to accept the idea that 4e failed..that does not mean that it would have succeeded if it was 3.75 like everyone around here wants. It could have turned out worse because of the large number of people who wanted something new.
Sure - a 3.75 could have turned out worse. But Pathfinder billed itself as a 3.75 and it didn't. So if you want to believe that a 3.75 wouldn't have done better than 4th edition, you'd have to assume that Wizards did a lot of things to piss off the fan-base as well - at least, if you were a halfway reasonable person. Today is April 23rd, 2015. Pathfinder is killing 4th edition. Well, to be fair, it already killed it. But if continued existence is a sign of success (and it usually is), Pathfinder can put that in the 'win' column.
CaptPike
Apprentice
Posts: 98
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2015 7:23 am

Post by CaptPike »

deaddmwalking wrote:
CaptPike wrote: And of course even if I were to accept the idea that 4e failed..that does not mean that it would have succeeded if it was 3.75 like everyone around here wants. It could have turned out worse because of the large number of people who wanted something new.
Sure - a 3.75 could have turned out worse. But Pathfinder billed itself as a 3.75 and it didn't. So if you want to believe that a 3.75 wouldn't have done better than 4th edition, you'd have to assume that Wizards did a lot of things to piss off the fan-base as well - at least, if you were a halfway reasonable person. Today is April 23rd, 2015. Pathfinder is killing 4th edition. Well, to be fair, it already killed it. But if continued existence is a sign of success (and it usually is), Pathfinder can put that in the 'win' column.
Today pathfinder is putting out new material and has a living campaign, 4e has neither. if you want to compare them do so when both were selling new materal on a regular basis. not when one is dead still and the other is not. after all how many people today that are playing 4e are buying new books from Wotc to do so? books sold is only a useful metric when new stuff is coming out.

Besides what do you think 5e is? THAT is what they think the 3e crowd wants and how well its that turning out?
MGuy
Prince
Posts: 4795
Joined: Tue Jul 21, 2009 5:18 am
Location: Indiana

Post by MGuy »

Guyz we have a thread for this guy. Let's keep the infection there and not spread it around again.
The first rule of Fatclub. Don't Talk about Fatclub..
If you want a game modded right you have to mod it yourself.
CaptPike
Apprentice
Posts: 98
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2015 7:23 am

Post by CaptPike »

MGuy wrote:Guyz we have a thread for this guy. Let's keep the infection there and not spread it around again.
must not let someone question the groupthink after all
User avatar
erik
King
Posts: 5868
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by erik »

Maxus wrote:
schpeelah wrote:
Gnorman wrote:Noooooo you summoned HIM whyyyy
Don't worry, we're inoculated. Maxus put "Zak S, Zak Smith, Dndwithpornstars, Zak Sabbath. He is a terrible person and a hack at writing and art. His cultural contributions are less than Justin Bieber's, and he's a shitmuffin. Go go gadget Googlebomb!" in his sig to drown his alerts in noise.
I have no idea if it works or not, but I like to think it does.
I think the real lure these days is when Muffins gets that massive spike when one of us stupidly links him and he gets maybe a dozen hits from a single source. The sig counters google alert, but not his inability to resist the lure of a few people following a link to his site.
User avatar
Leress
Prince
Posts: 2770
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Leress »

CaptPike wrote:
MGuy wrote:Guyz we have a thread for this guy. Let's keep the infection there and not spread it around again.
must not let someone question the groupthink after all
Oh you can question, just be ready to back it up.
Koumei wrote:I'm just glad that Jill Stein stayed true to her homeopathic principles by trying to win with .2% of the vote. She just hasn't diluted it enough!
Koumei wrote:I am disappointed in Santorum: he should carry his dead election campaign to term!
Just a heads up... Your post is pregnant... When you miss that many periods it's just a given.
I want him to tongue-punch my box.
]
The divine in me says the divine in you should go fuck itself.
...You Lost Me
Duke
Posts: 1854
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 5:21 am

Post by ...You Lost Me »

CaptPike wrote:must not let someone question the groupthink after all
CaptPike wrote:as I have said many many times before it succeeded on the amazon best seller list
Are you aware of the words you're typing, or are your responses just like a stream of consciousness? This is so bad it's bordering on parody.
DSMatticus wrote:Again, look at this fucking map you moron. Take your finger and trace each country's coast, then trace its claim line. Even you - and I say that as someone who could not think less of your intelligence - should be able to tell that one of these things is not like the other.
Kaelik wrote:I invented saying mean things about Tussock.
Red_Rob
Prince
Posts: 2594
Joined: Fri Jul 17, 2009 10:07 pm

Post by Red_Rob »

CaptPike wrote:Today pathfinder is putting out new material and has a living campaign, 4e has neither. if you want to compare them do so when both were selling new materal on a regular basis. not when one is dead still and the other is not.
Does this not give you pause for thought as to why? Why WotC would cease to print an edition and hand sales and market share to a rival if it was selling well?

Do you also believe Betamax and HD-DVD were "wildly successful" and the manufacturers simply stopped selling them for the lulz?
Last edited by Red_Rob on Fri Apr 24, 2015 2:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Simplified Tome Armor.

Tome item system and expanded Wish Economy rules.

Try our fantasy card game Clash of Nations! Available via Print on Demand.

“Those Who Can Make You Believe Absurdities, Can Make You Commit Atrocities” - Voltaire
Post Reply