QuoteI'm not having a 'shit-fit'.  Please don't attribute such silly reactions to someone you don't even know.

Nothing in what I've said should be construed as indicating that RC is 'better' or 'worse' than 3.x. That is a wholly separate matter -- just as the question of whether WFRP 2e is 'better' or 'worse' than 3.x D&D. They're just different games -- that's all I'm claiming. We can debate their relative merits some other time.

This is utter bullshit and you know it.  You've made your prejudices utterly clear elsewhere.  This thread is not a vacuum, and if you think I'm going to let you get away with pretending your biases don't have anything to do with the nonsense you're spouting, then I'm going to ask you to apologize for treating me like I'm a fucking idiot.  

Your "analysis" has nothing to do with anything but your own personal biases.

Quote from: J ArcaneThis is utter bullshit and you know it.  You've made your prejudices utterly clear elsewhere.  This thread is not a vacuum, and if you think I'm going to let you get away with pretending your biases don't have anything to do with the nonsense you're spouting, then I'm going to ask you to apologize for treating me like I'm a fucking idiot.  

Your "analysis" has nothing to do with anything but your own personal biases.

:confused:

Since when did thinking that 3e+ D&D is essentially a different 'game system' from pre-3e D&D become a criticism of 3e?  

Don't believe me because of my 'prejudices'?

Then consider this wise observation:

Quote from: BalbinusI have to admit, to me 3.5 doesn't look that much like earlier forms of DnD.  Certainly no more than say Palladium Fantasy or Rolemaster.

I mean, I can see the family connection, but to me it ain't the same game anymore than Rolemaster is an edition of DnD.

That said, I don't actually care, the more important question is whether or not 3.5 is a good game and clearly to that the answer has to be yes.

Really, I don't see why this is such a big issue for you.  

And for the record, I like 3e.  If I hated the system, I wouldn't have run two campaigns.  Now, it is not my preferred system, and IME it feels like a different system from RC D&D.  But I'm happy to play it.

Really, it's a simple logical point that I'm making here.  Pointing out that x |= y in no way involves a value judgement as to whether x is 'better' or 'worse' than y.

You "like" 3e?  Is that why there's those threads that involve you crowing about how much better RC and Rolemaster are, and how much simpler, etc. etc.?

Please do not treat me like an idiot.  It makes me very cross.

Quote from: J ArcaneYou "like" 3e?  Is that why there's those threads that involve you crowing about how much better RC and Rolemaster are, and how much simpler, etc. etc.?

Please do not treat me like an idiot.  It makes me very cross.

'Crowing?' :confused:

Again, it is very simple: 'liking' something doesn't mean that one has to regard it as the 'best' version of that thing.

Some illustrations:

"I like Italian food, but not as much as Indian."
"I like Beamish stout, but not as much as Guinness."
"I like Risk, but not as much as Axis and Allies."
"I like 3e D&D, but not as much as RC D&D."

Comprendez-Vous?  :teacher:

Here are some basic distinctions to keep in mind:

1.  Recognising that 'x =| y; does not entail any value judgement about x versus y.

2.  One can like things to varying degrees.

I think you're interpreting my comments as a lot more hostile than I mean them to be.  I feel like I should apologize, but I'm not sure what I've done wrong.

Right.  Cause going about suggesting 3e D&D isn't really D&D but a totally different game is anything but a value judgement, especially in light of your past stated prejudices.

Give me a goddamn break.  You don't do a very good job of backpedaling, you know.

Quote from: J ArcaneRight.  Cause going about suggesting 3e D&D isn't really D&D but a totally different game is anything but a value judgement, especially in light of your past stated prejudices.

Give me a goddamn break.  You don't do a very good job of backpedaling, you know.

Please point out where exactly I am engaging in 'backpedaling'?  :confused:  

As for suggesting that 3e D&D "isn't really D&D", that actually has not been my claim.  I don't believe that D&D has some kind of 'Platonic Form' that 3e fails to adequately instantiate.  They're both called 'D&D'.  So what?  I still think that they're effectively different systems, whatever they're called.

Also, why are my preferences 'prejudices'?  So I prefer some games over D&D 3e.  Why is that a 'prejudice'?

Moreover, many people who vastly prefer 3e D&D over earlier versions are thankful that it is significantly different from earlier versions.  Are they also 'prejudiced'?  :confused:

I don't think that there is any point in pursuing this tangent any further.  You seem to have formed some impression of me that is clearly affecting your ability to address what I actually state.  It's hard for me to see how this discourse could be improved.

Well ... maybe with magic.  :wizard:

QuoteI don't think that there is any point in pursuing this tangent any further. You seem to have formed some impression of me that is clearly affecting your ability to address what I actually state. It's hard for me to see how this discourse could be improved.

It can't be, so long as you refuse to own up to your own bias.  This isn't RPGnet.  You really can just say "I don't like 3e" or even "I think 3e is an abomination unto god.  RC FTW!!!", and be done with it, without all the pussyfooting around.

Quote from: J ArcaneIt can't be, so long as you refuse to own up to your own bias.  This isn't RPGnet.  You really can just say "I don't like 3e" or even "I think 3e is an abomination unto god.  RC FTW!!!", and be done with it, without all the pussyfooting around.

DAMN STRAIGHT, BECAUSE THERE IS A FUCKING WAR GOING ON. IN WAR THIS IS NO GOD DAMN SHADE OF GRAY, PINKO MOTHER-HUMPING LIKE OR I'LL PLAY THAT IF THERE ISN'T ANYTHING ELSE GOING OR THAT'S OK, BUT I PREFER THIS. THERE IS ON UNDYING LOVE OR UNQUENCHABLE HATE!!!!

YOU THINK WINSTON CHURCHHILL WAS OK WITH GERRY? YOU BETTER BET YOUR LEFT UNION JACK TATOOED TESTICLE HE WASN'T! WAS HE ALL I'LL ALLY WITH THAT FUCKNUT CHARLES DE GAULLE IF THERE ISN'T ANYBODY ELSE HANDY? WHAT ABOUT HARRY TRUMAN, DO YOU THINK HE WAS LUKEWARM ABOUT THROWING IN WITH STALIN?

Quote from: J ArcaneIt can't be, so long as you refuse to own up to your own bias.  This isn't RPGnet.  You really can just say "I don't like 3e" or even "I think 3e is an abomination unto god.  RC FTW!!!", and be done with it, without all the pussyfooting around.

Bias?

... I like 3e, but not as much as any of the games listed in my sig under 'favourites'.  

Okay?  That's my bias.

It seems like you want me to hate 3e.  Sorry, I just can't do it.  I mean, I'll criticize aspects of 3e.  But that doesn't mean I hate 3e.

Don't get me wrong, I'll never marry 3e.  But I've shared some nights with 3e, and for that I'll always be grateful.  No, 3e is not the 'one' for me.  But I do hope 3e finds happiness.

I really hope there are no dual stat books post release of this product.

Otherwise, I expect it will be really good and look forward to reviewing it once it's released.

Monte Cook and World of Darkness.

What are two things that have never generated anything of interest to me, Alex?


"Correct!"

Quote from: SpikeSo: the current barbarian, while hardly a masterpeice of conanosity is hardly a 'big dumb brute that hulks out' in every regard. Other than the completely disposable illeteracy rule, which is... completely disposable.

Point duly noted.  The present barbarian could be worse.