Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Soulmage 05-28-06, 11:34 AM	Thanks!
stealth_monkey 05-28-06, 11:42 AM	Please Examine And Critique Honestly
Thorak 05-28-06, 02:22 PM	"This is probably a dumb idea but don't call me an idiot because my self esteem is really low". At least, that's how I see it. In my experience, someone saying "PEACH" isn't looking for honest criticism, they're looking for support. I've gone into a few threads, and done my typical "A and B don't really make sense, because of X and Y" and gotten yelled at for not being "supportive". Here's a news flash to everyone; someone telling you what is wrong or what doesn't make sense is constructive. Because you can then rethink that portion, and either support it better or change it to make sense. Stop thinking that people are only being honest and supportive if they agree with you 100%. This likely isn't true in all cases, of course, but it's happened enough I've stated avoiding any thread that says PEACH, unless the idea strikes me as completely ridiculous.
belthazzar1113 05-28-06, 02:31 PM	peach means please don't hate me because i am trying to sneak world shattering power into a dnd game under the guise of this class. most people who put peach are trying to justify breaking the game and being uber powerful. which is exactly why those are the threads that you should go to and point out every single broken thing you can find. THe only reason i ever put a class of mine here is because i am hopeing someone will rip it up and show me where the flaws are. I don't care if people like it or not, i made it for my own use, but i like things to be balanced and fit, so it helps to have other opinions on the matter. most of the stuff that gets put up here i don't think deserves to be a base class at all, nor do i think most of it is any good. Some few exceptions are out there, but mostly this board is just a palce to laugh at people trying to sneak deific power in a custom class, or watch kids whine that "their" class isn't good enough or can't do XYZ better than other classes.
Dragonteuthis 05-28-06, 02:56 PM	Once again, I have to agree with Thorak, for the most part. The point of putting up "PEACH" is really pointless. Imagine: I'm ticked off after a bad day at work, I got cut off in traffic fourteen times on the way home, the baby ripped up my favorite character sheet, a neighborhood kid ran over my rare pet Burmese Zig-zag Lizard, someone drank the last of the soda, and the dog has diarhea. Indoors. I head to the boards, ready to lay out some fire and brimstone to lower my boiling point. Coming across a thread, I snarl out of the misspelled title to myself, and cackle, preparing to reduce the hapless author to cinders, like an unsuspecting ant under the magnifying lens focusing my searing rage onto him. But what ho, what's this? "P.E.A.C.H.?" No! The scoundrel! He's defeated me with his clever request.! Since he's immune I move on...reluctantly, I find a post that's well written, with actual grammar and careful attention to existing rules and game balance. But ha! He's forgotten to ward himself with the ubquitous "P.E.A.C.H." and therefore I don't have to treat him like a fellow human being! Down he goes under a torrent of flames, insults, and snide dismissals. That went on for longer than I anticipated, but the basic concept is this: By putting PEACH in your post, that doesn't elevate you to some special status. Theoretically, people should approach a rules suggestion with such a concept in mind ANYWAYS, right? What are you doing, reminding them? "They may have forgotten to examine this...oh, and maybe they're not honest. This acronym will fix things for sure!" Oftentimes it seems to simply be an excuse to add some all-caps to a thread title. PEACH is quite redundant, and I often skip over posts with that term included.
Tamelo 05-28-06, 03:07 PM	But that is the opposite of how PEACH is meant to be used! PEACH means, or at least meant when introduced, that the poster WANTS criticizm of his work. Constructive criticizm, presumably, but criticizm none-the-less. It means, or should mean, they realize it is sub-optimal, but want advice to improve it. Thank you for your time.
Thorak 05-28-06, 03:38 PM	But that is the opposite of how PEACH is meant to be used! PEACH means, or at least meant when introduced, that the poster WANTS criticizm of his work. Constructive criticizm, presumably, but criticizm none-the-less. It means, or should mean, they realize it is sub-optimal, but want advice to improve it. Thank you for your time. In my experience, anyone who says "PEACH" wants one of two things. For you to say "OMG, that's awesome, can I use that in my game?" Or for you to fill out all the holes and flavor of the concept because they're too ass-lazy to do it themselves. I've been yelled at too many times for giving honest criticism in a PEACH thread to take it at face value.
legowarrior 05-28-06, 04:54 PM	Well, I certainly use PEACH as it is intended, though I don't always take people's advice, I do thank them for it. As for Thorak's own experience with it, well, I have found that Thorak, though knowledgable, and right 9 times out of 10 in any discussion on the forum, has a tendency to come off slightly arrogant. That may at times account for the overly hostile responses to his honest critics. Anyway, whether a person puts PEACH or not in front of his/her post, the chances are that it usually hasn't had all the play testing that Wizards does, so may have some flaws. Them's the breaks, but I have seem some interesting ideas. I most like the ones for substitute levels that was started.
FatMonkey13 05-28-06, 05:14 PM	PEACH means, or at least meant when introduced, that the poster WANTS criticizm of his work. What he said PEACH means I want to know what is wrong with this, how can i fix it, it is any good... It asks for the reader to please examine (look closely for flaws, possible abuse...), and criticize/critique honestly (tell the truth, do not sugar coat it). If a person does not want their post examined and criticized honestly they should not use PEACH (and then it looks, as there is little reason for them to post...)
danielinthewolvesden 05-28-06, 07:10 PM	In my experience, anyone who says "PEACH" wants one of two things. For you to say "OMG, that's awesome, can I use that in my game?" Or for you to fill out all the holes and flavor of the concept because they're too ass-lazy to do it themselves. I've been yelled at too many times for giving honest criticism in a PEACH thread to take it at face value. I hate to agree with Thorak :P but he's completely right here. In any case, in any thread, everyone has the right to and should "Please Examine And Critique Honestly". Thus, putting that on your OP is either redundant or dishonest. I am going to be nice and allow folks to admit to just having it be redundant. :D
Dragonteuthis 05-28-06, 07:59 PM	PEACH means, or at least meant when introduced, that the poster WANTS criticizm of his work. Constructive criticizm, presumably, but criticizm none-the-less. So you're saying, I should only examine and critique (with honesty, mind you) posts that have the acronym in front of them? So that, newcomers to the board, with no knowledge of this "secret password" get treated with less respect? The mere act of posting a suggestion, or rule proposition, ASSUMES that one is looking for constructive critiscism. To remove that assumption and place it into a fruity acronym is...well, it's not progress that's for sure. Seems like a step backwards to me, honestly.
OamuTheMonk 05-28-06, 09:14 PM	...I am here to tell you (especially Thorak, who is normally big on RAW) that PEACH was created precisely due to the complaints they are making: "This is probably a dumb idea but don't call me an idiot because my self esteem is really low". peach means please don't hate me because i am trying to sneak world shattering power into a dnd game under the guise of this class. Long story short, I wanted to be able to tell who wanted criticism, and who wanted fawning praise. I made a promise in the original thread where I hacked out the concept (now lost to history--edit: found (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=543861&page=1&pp=30)) that I would review any post I saw with PEACH in the title line--I spent about three months doing so with nary a complaint, and eventually had to break said promise due to the sheer volume of PEACH posts. So I can honestly say it's worked very well for me. On another note, I was (and am still) quite fascinated with the anti-PEACH backlash that sprang up once the number of PEACH posts started to multiply. There seems to be an element in human nature that hates when something becomes a little bit popular--even something as insignifigant as an acronym! So, the actual definition of PEACH is is linked in my signature. It might be nice if you read it, Thorak, before spouting such atrocious misinformation to the general public. You may not be a fan of the concept, but at least you can give the OP a chance to hate it for himself. For someone who relentlessly hammers people for their poor grasp of the RAW, getting the (simple!) PEACH concept exactly backwards is something of an irony.
OamuTheMonk 05-28-06, 09:30 PM	PEACH is actually in Trollbill's terminology part deux: here. (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=7353525&postcount=3) Part 2 covers acronyms and abbreviations.
Jaid 05-29-06, 12:36 AM	So, the actual definition of PEACH is is linked in my signature. It might be nice if you read it, Thorak, before spouting such atrocious misinformation to the general public. You may not be a fan of the concept, but at least you can give the OP a chance to hate it for himself. For someone who relentlessly hammers people for their poor grasp of the RAW, getting the (simple!) PEACH concept exactly backwards is something of an irony.i am sure thorak knows exactly what the official meaning of it is. i believe the point he's making is that it isn't often used like that, regardless of what it's supposed to mean. ie, many of the people who put "PEACH" into their thread title are putting it there for reasons other than a desire for others to examine and critique it honestly... or, to put it yet another way, the people who put PEACH into their thread title really just want you to be a yes-man, rather than to point out flaws in their design so it can be corrected. personally, i have a tendency to ignore PEACH... i'll examine it if i am interested enough, and if i give advice or point out problems, that's nice, but i'm sure as heck not gonna go out of my way to avoid pointing out problems just because it doesn't say PEACH, and i sure as heck am not going to go out of my way to examine and critique something that i have no interest in just because it says PEACH. certainly, people are welcome to use it. but i find, more often than not, stuff that says PEACH in the title is the stuff i have no desire to apply PEACH to. this may have something to do with the fact that, as pointed out by others, PEACH is often misused, and the author often doesn't actually want you to examine and critique honestly. this may also have something to do with the fact that i feel there are already far too many base classes out there, and any new class had bloody well better be introducing a new concept that is generic enough and flexible enough to represent archetypes that are not currently covered... and i don't have enough interest or patience to look at a million classes that are really, at best, class variants. also, i feel it's almost like saying "i understand you don't normally examine and critique honestly, but please make an exception for this thread". it's just silly.... it's like saying "please don't flame me" in the thread title... it's almost just begging for the opposite. it's also kinda like saying "this thread isn't normally worth the time for you to consider or critique honestly, but please do it anyways." basically, as has been said... IMO, PEACH is a pointless acronym. it should not need to be said. if anything, the reverse should be indicated, and the practise of examining and critiquing honestly should be standard policy.
Thorak 05-29-06, 12:56 AM	...I am here to tell you (especially Thorak, who is normally big on RAW) that PEACH was created precisely due to the complaints they are making: I have never in my life on these boards ever done anything but critique honestly. If the PEACH acronym was created because of people like me, that proves my point. It wasn't created to generate honest criticism. It was created to get purely supportive backslapping and encouragement. I'm not your dad, or your grade school teacher. I have absolutely no reason to pat you on the back unless you deserve it. And if I don't think you do, I will say so. Because that is honest critique. On another note, I was (and am still) quite fascinated with the anti-PEACH backlash that sprang up once the number of PEACH posts started to multiply. There seems to be an element in human nature that hates when something becomes a little bit popular--even something as insignifigant as an acronym! No, I hate it because it's often used to mean exactly the opposite of what it actually says. So, the actual definition of PEACH is is linked in my signature. It might be nice if you read it, Thorak, before spouting such atrocious misinformation to the general public. I'm perfectly aware of what it means. People don't often use it to ask for what they really want, is my point. Note my statement in my first post in the thread wasn't anything close to an acronym that could work out to spell PEACH. In fact, it spells TIPADIBDCMAIBMSEIRL. I'm pretty sure it's fairly obvious I didn't intend it to be what PEACH actually stands for. Instead, it refers to what people use it for. As was clear to me the first time I got yelled at because my "honest criticism" wasn't supportive and happy enough for the OP. I am the living incarnation of PEACH. I examine and critique honestly every damn thread I participate in. People don't like me because when I disagree, I don't pansy around trying to protect their fragile little egoes. It's not like I run around insulting people. If you can't handle someone saying "you're wrong", then you're not going to be able to handle this thing called "life" very well.
belthazzar1113 05-29-06, 01:41 AM	The reason behind the peach backlash is the same as the offense some people have against "baby on board" or "kids in car" tags you can get for your windows of your vehical. its like say, "hey i know your a big F***ing A**hole, but please, i got kids so dial it back" on the one hand thats a nice sentiment... protect the children. on the other, they just called me a big F***ing A**hole. Its implied insult. peach is the same thing. Its assuming that people are just going to be jerks and say hey that sucks, or omgz iz zoooo br0k3n!!!!11! joo suxzors!!.... and they think that everyone will be doing this and somehow reminding people against being royal jagoffs is somehow going to prevent them from getting flamed. Its implied that we are all jerks, flamers and have nothing better to do than be dipwads on some dnd boards. Give it a rest. If you want feed back just put "honest feedback requested" and then include IN THE TEXT of the post things you were looking for comment on. Certain powers, the level range, damge range, flavor text ect. things you felt unsure of and wanted to call attention to to get some response both critical and supportive. Those posts i usally read. PEACH posts i just open, spot the ultimate cosmic power, point it out as suckage and over powered and move on. And that doesn't really help anyone. most people end up avoiding PEACH posts, which is why you should stop using them. Like the terms, politically correct, handicapped, and blind, PEACH has become more of a problem than that it was ment to circumvent. THis happens to words. YOu come up with a nice little handle to replace the problem and make it seem ok and then people finally realize hey, that didn't fix anything, it just covered it up like we were too stupid to notice!! so why don't we just all do our thing and let peach die a nice quiet death.
legowarrior 05-29-06, 04:26 AM	LONG LIVE THE PEACH! My god people.... so much hate to a simple word. But seriously, your right, many people simple assume that the forum will be hostile, or will simple ignore their posts. It happens enough to me, that's for sure. So, they add PEACH to it, hoping that it will get a little love, not knowing that those on the forum how have been around for a while look down upon others who are just trying to get some help. I personally have never, in the entire 2 years I've been hear, come across a PEACH that didn't respond, if not positive, at least not negative to my remarks. That's not to say they agreed with me, because at times, I got things wrong, but they were polite (to a point) about pointing out why they disagreed with me. The fact of the matter is, that if you are getting overly hostile responses for your criticism, then perhaps the problem does not lie with the PEACHer but with you. I know from my own experiences that many of the better informed on this forum have a tendency to rush in to a thread and claim that the Class would PWN all man kind if it had a chance. Might be the case, but who knows. Thank you for listening. As to what belthazzar1113 said, (are there 1113 other belthazzar's in the world?) if you do have particular issues that you want to draw the eye to, well mention it after you wrote down the ability. But watch out for Thorak, he might claim that your just being lazy or not thinking it through, and blast you for it.
Thorak 05-29-06, 11:57 AM	The fact of the matter is, that if you are getting overly hostile responses for your criticism, then perhaps the problem does not lie with the PEACHer but with you. I know from my own experiences that many of the better informed on this forum have a tendency to rush in to a thread and claim that the Class would PWN all man kind if it had a chance. Might be the case, but who knows. I cause a lot of hate on these boards. Heck, there's your original comment here about my arrogance, and there's daniel's comment; "I hate to agree with Thorak . . ." I'm not arrogant. I am confident. There's a big difference. If I were arrogant, I would refuse to admit error (and I do admit error when I'm proven wrong), and I would act as if me saying something made it true. And yes, I can be forced to eat humble pie. I'll go kicking and screaming, but when push comes to shove, I'll eat that sucker and admit you got me. The only thing I require is that you prove me wrong, first. However, I point-blank tell people when, IMO, they are wrong. In as many words. I don't see any reason to pussyfoot around trying to protect people's feelings from criticism. This is how I am in real life, too; if I see a problem with something, I'll tell you straight up. I am, in short, brutally honest. Maybe that's not a perfect quality, but I happen to prefer it to wasting time and effort trying to protect people's feelings from honest criticism. If you can't take someone telling you that you are wrong, or that your idea doesn't make any sense because of A, B, and C, then asking for feedback in any public forum (in which I mean the more general, rather than internet, sense) isn't a good idea. Because the public isn't your friend, and doesn't have any reason to protect your feelings. I'm not directly insulting in any thread unless I've been insulted first, and I truly try and avoid even that. People don't like me because I'm confident, often pretty much right, and I have no compunctions against calling them out on their mistakes. And I'm okay with that; I don't post here to make friends and be everybody's buddy. If I get a reputation as a hardass who's often right, that's perfectly fine. I know I ain't perfect. But I don't pretend to be, either. I am who I am. But watch out for Thorak, he might claim that your just being lazy or not thinking it through, and blast you for it. I can't recall ever calling a specific person on the boards "lazy" in my time here. If I did, it was a case of them posting one line asking for the boards to build them a character from scratch with history and all. And I think I'd be justified, there. As for not thinking things through, sure, I'll point that out, as well as what makes me say that. But that's as far as I'm "blasting" them about it. That's pretty much exactly what I say; "you haven't thought this through, if you combine class ability X with this other ability Y, you'll be able to do Z, which is clearly broken." That's not blasting, it's bare-bones, honest criticism. And if they have thought it through and that was their intent, well, we can then start discussing how broken Z is. People mistake honest criticism for personal attacks, and confidence for arrogance. That's the root of the problems they have with me, though I freely admit I'm also abrasive and stubborn as a thick-headed mule.
OamuTheMonk 05-29-06, 11:58 AM	I have never in my life on these boards ever done anything but critique honestly. If the PEACH acronym was created because of people like me, that proves my point. It wasn't created to generate honest criticism. It was created to get purely supportive backslapping and encouragement. I'm going to address you in as simple a manner as possible. You have it backwards. I created PEACH specifically because I was having trouble finding people who were looking for honest criticism. I had the same complaint you seem to be making now. Regardless of whether you think it has been successful, or whether it's a good idea, or whether it works, you are wrong. It was not created to help people get backslapping praise. I have the original thread as evidence of the thought processes that went into it's creation, here. (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=543861&page=1&pp=30) For you to sit there and say: I'm perfectly aware of what it means. ...and also say that you know why it was created: It was created to get purely supportive backslapping and encouragement. ...shows you in your true light. You pretend to be a true neutral arbiter of facts and truth, but you're really just a troll, perfectly willing to say things that are not only false, but are designed to be inflammatory. You don't know why I created this (insignifigant!) acronym. You may have opinions (which may be perfectly reasonable) on how it doesn't work, or how people use it wrong, or how it's annoying, or how it shouldn't be necessary,...However! You are mistaken (or, as I suspect, simply Trolling) when you claim to understand what thought processes I had when I created it. I have several pages of written evidence to the contrary (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=543861&page=1&pp=30), and you don't have a rhetorical leg to stand on.
legowarrior 05-29-06, 12:37 PM	In my experience, anyone who says "PEACH" wants one of two things. For you to say "OMG, that's awesome, can I use that in my game?" Or for you to fill out all the holes and flavor of the concept because they're too ass-lazy to do it themselves. I've been yelled at too many times for giving honest criticism in a PEACH thread to take it at face value. Perhaps I miss read it. You tell me. Yeah, I bolded the significant part. By the by, I don't think that Thorak is a troll, despite what others think.
Thorak 05-29-06, 01:17 PM	I'm going to address you in as simple a manner as possible. You have it backwards. I created PEACH specifically because I was having trouble finding people who were looking for honest criticism. I had the same complaint you seem to be making now. I know why you created it. I'm pointing that, however good your intentions were, your work is now being ruined by people who aren't using it correctly. Regardless of whether you think it has been successful, or whether it's a good idea, or whether it works, you are wrong. It was not created to help people get backslapping praise. I have the original thread as evidence of the thought processes that went into it's creation, here. (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=543861&page=1&pp=30) I'm not talking about why you created it. I'm talking about what you can expect in a thread with PEACH attached to it. Two completely different things. ...shows you in your true light. You pretend to be a true neutral arbiter of facts and truth, but you're really just a troll, perfectly willing to say things that are not only false, but are designed to be inflammatory. Or I'm able to separate the intent behind the creation of something, and what those who use it actually use it for. It's like if someone invented a small, concealable pistol for women to carry in their purses for protection, and assassins started using it extensively. If asked, I'd say it's an assassin's pistol. Because that's what it is used for, regardless of the creator's intent. It is perfectly possible for me to discuss what PEACH is used to represent without discussing what you, the creator, originally meant by it. This is what I mean. I provide an honest criticism of the use of your acronym, by people other than yourself, and I am now being labelled as a troll because you don't agree with what I have said. You are becoming the epitome of what I'm talking about, Oamu. You want people to slap your back and say "good show", rather than providing any actual criticism. Maybe that's out of line, but that's where I see this going at this point.
Damon_Caskey 05-29-06, 01:26 PM	I have to say, I am now sorry I labeled my concepts with PEACH. I had no idea the board was hostile to the concept, and in fact, at first thought that if you did not use PEACH, you were asking to be ignored. As far as I knew, PEACH was simply the accepted way to ask for a review, and you would not be responded to otherwise. When I came to this board, I saw PEACH, looked up its definition as just assumed that was the way things are done. I worked my butt off trying to keep my ideas playable, flavorful, and what seems to be a small thing here but to me a big point of contention: LEGIBLE. Then I made a newbie mistake and used PEACH. So far I have about 5 or so legitimate responses. Now I am left to wander if my concept is so unworthy of review people do not bother, or if the PEACH label is the culprit. It seems to me at this point, while a perhaps good idea on paper, the end result is that PEACH is the pits. Cheers, Damon Caskey
danielinthewolvesden 05-29-06, 02:01 PM	...I am here to tell you (especially Thorak, who is normally big on RAW) that PEACH was created precisely due to the complaints they are making: Long story short, I wanted to be able to tell who wanted criticism, and who wanted fawning praise. There are two huge problems with the PEACH concept; 1. Every single thread here can be replied to with criticism, whether the OP likes it or not. The OP does not get to choose which type of replies he gets. 2. Nigh every single OP I have seen with "PEACH" has ignored honest criticisms. They did write "PEACH" but they still only wanted fawning praise. In fact, when I see the phase "PEACH" in an OP I now assume what they really mean is "I am prentending to ask for honest criticism, but I really only want fawning praise". It's all very nice that you created it otherwise, but look at what happened to Dr Frankenstiens creation. :P You also can't force folks to use "PEACH" in the way you intended. PEACH was always redundant, and now it's even taken on the opposite meaning. Thorak: "I cause a lot of hate on these boards. ...and there's daniel's comment; "I hate to agree with Thorak . ."- you DID notice the :P after I said that, right?
OamuTheMonk 05-29-06, 03:14 PM	I'm not talking about why you created it. Earlier... It wasn't created to generate honest criticism. It was created to get purely supportive backslapping and encouragement. This is what I mean. I provide an honest criticism of the use of your acronym, by people other than yourself, and I am now being labelled as a troll because you don't agree with what I have said. trolling or baiting by putting to the screen inflammatory statements designed to elicit a negative response from the community I don't agree with you lying about my intentions. When a poster asks a question in a sincere manner, and you answer with a falsehood regarding someone else's motivations--and you did--that's inflammatory. Your opinions about PEACH's use (it doesn't work, people use it incorrectly, it shouldn't be necessary, etcetra) are all perfectly reasonable complaints. They don't jibe with my experiences, but I obviously haven't seen every PEACH post made, so they may be true. Now you may have made these comments in an offhand manner, without intending to make an honest assessment of my motivations, but for someone who puts the screws so readily to anyone else's verbal missteps, you should be more precise in what you say.
Raymond_Luxury_Yacht 05-29-06, 03:32 PM	I always find it amusing that the people who hate PEACH the most are the ones who are almost never on the Monsters board, where it is actually used correctly, and where it was needed simply to avoid wasting time with an obscenely large number of people who would flame anyone who criticized their work.
Thorak 05-29-06, 03:36 PM	Earlier... I don't agree with you lying about my intentions. When a poster asks a question in a sincere manner, and you answer with a falsehood regarding someone else's motivations--and you did--that's inflammatory. Your opinions about PEACH's use (it doesn't work, people use it incorrectly, it shouldn't be necessary, etcetra) are all perfectly reasonable complaints. They don't jibe with my experiences, but I obviously haven't seen every PEACH post made, so they may be true. Now you may have made these comments in an offhand manner, without intending to make an honest assessment of my motivations, but for someone who puts the screws so readily to anyone else's verbal missteps, you should be more precise in what you say. Fine then, I apologize for mistakenly suggesting you might have created the term with this intent. What I intended to say was regarding the use of the term. Like I said, if you present me with deserved humble pie, I'll eat it. That's still no call to be accusing me of being a troll, though. Me honestly making an error doesn't translate as me being deliberately inflammatory. And I'm hardly the only one pointing out the problems with PEACH.
Kiklio 05-29-06, 03:39 PM	PEACH...meh. It's yet another insidious buzzphrase (a bastardization of catchphrase and buzzword designed with irony in mind. This entire parnethetical statement, in fact, serves to further the irony upon irony, until it becomes so rhetorical that you wish to track me down and shoot me.). When you have a title like "PEACH: [insert class/spell name here]", I think, "What's more important to you, the tone of my response, or your post?". "[Insert idea here]: PEACH", however, elicits, "Did you just tack that on as an afterthought?". In short, it has no meaning because- A) It's stating the obvious. You're already supposed to Examine (by reading it) and Critique Honestly (unless you gain sick pleasure by lying on the Internet and saying to yourself, "Ha ha! I just lied! And there's nobody who can stop me! That poor sap just got bad advice!") B) It's annoying. Taking a few seconds to mull over the insipid quality of PEACH's redundancy seems to only have the purpose of creating animosity. Thus, I hate PEACH, and my explaination of its use (not its intent, which is clearly defined as intending nothing already implied) isn't helpful to you in the slightest. Ha ha, I say to you whoever read this. Ha ha, I say to all of you who actively seek to keep a reputation on a forum, or to safeguard your work by slapping PEACH on it. Sure, I put my work on here. I have a few PRC's, some powers, and some new vestiges locked up in back pages. Not a whole lot of it sees comments. PEACH further aggravates me because it screams, "Respond, for the love of God, respond! I may or may not be desperate here!". My response: Ignore.
belthazzar1113 05-29-06, 03:40 PM	I am all for catching Thorak in a verbal snafu, but really who cares. The end result of this thread shouldn't be "Dude we got Thorak saying something stupid" It should be that the noble experiment of Peach quietly and silently goes away. It might have been a great idea created with good intentions. But good intentions don't last past the intending. Peach has become a part of everything that is annoying on these boards with people posting classes and races and PrCs and everything else and sticking Peach on it without even realizing what that means. Its become a cry for attention and praise rather than an invatation to honest and open critisum. Its attracted more of the trolls and flamers rather than the Thoraks and me's that will point out exactly what is bad and what is good in your idea. Its become a stomping ground for people to rip ideas apart and leave the peices with no offerings of ways to fix things. Its completely backwashed over its intentions and become a symbol for the thing it was ment to prevent. People are getting sidetracked here by intentions, motivations, mis spoken words... The real heart of the matter should be the thing it self, not we who talk about it. So lets all just take a deep breath and stop hassleing the hardass just because he might have spoken a word or two you disagree with. Then we can get focused on getting rid of an acronym thats outlived its usefulness. and yeah. thats about as nice as i am ever going to be. lol.
ArochanoX 05-29-06, 04:04 PM	There's always the SHIO that means the same as PEACH but without the disguise. SHIO: Supportive & Helpful Input Only. So the poster, who writes this into his post, don't even want criticism, they want only positive "OMG! that's totally awesome!" -posts. Peach originally meant a positive thing. Too often board browsers just glanced the post and replied. "Too broken because it has d12 HD and full casting" or something similar without really looking at the class mechanics. If that d12 HD full caster used his Hp for spellcasting to balance things out, the reply could've been "That's quite a new system. The thing that this caster is much more powerful than sorcerer if he has a decent con is not a balanced mechanic. Maybe you should increase the spell's Hp cost?" That kind of criticism is very good and for that the PEACH was invented. Then because of American little dnd boy's bad self-esteem, the flaming of criticism was born. In the boards, we don't know each others education decree, knowledge of dnd or age. Every poster can as equally post anything in here. Some forty-year old veteran that knows ALL the rules perfectly, could get beaten down verbally if he posted a class that used some difficult mechanic that thirteen year old's couldn't completely understand. Those things one cannot understand are easily said overpowered because one can intepret it wrong. These same problems exist in every magazine's reader's comments -pages. The problem isn't with the PEACH, the problem is the users.
OamuTheMonk 05-29-06, 04:30 PM	That's still no call to be accusing me of being a troll, though. Me honestly making an error doesn't translate as me being deliberately inflammatory. And I'm hardly the only one pointing out the problems with PEACH. I hereby retract my claim that Thorak is a Troll. And, yeah, I know there seem to be quite a few people who dislike PEACH. Like I said, their complaints (like yours) may be completely valid. It doesn't jibe with my experiences, but that may be because of this: I always find it amusing that the people who hate PEACH the most are the ones who are almost never on the Monsters board, where it is actually used correctly, and where it was needed simply to avoid wasting time with an obscenely large number of people who would flame anyone who criticized their work. It's true that most of the posts I look at are on the Monsters board--It's where the idea came about. Then we can get focused on getting rid of an acronym thats outlived its usefulness. My best advice on this front is simply to ignore it...If enough people ignore the PEACH tag, people will stop using it. However, in my experience, there are people (again, on the Monsters board) who try to make it a point to at least look at PEACH posts. The system works fine in my experience.
Psychoticpsymon 05-29-06, 04:56 PM	After rereading the original PEACH thread, I now feel like it was supposed to be a way for the boards to become elitist- the point was to elevate certain people above the "stupid 8-year olds".
OamuTheMonk 05-29-06, 05:26 PM	I make no claim otherwise. However, I would like to point out that at many times during the thread, I pointed out that I had no desire to ruin anyone's fun--I just wanted to be able to tell who actually wanted to make stuff that worked in the game--being able to use homebrew stuff in D&D should be the most inclusive position. Theoretically, we're all playing in the same ruleset. Creating Monsters or Prestige classes that seem to be designed to work in D&D (using D&D-standard terms like BAB, AC, Special qualities, Spell-like abilities, etcetera), but, in reality, are broken and unplayable--that requires a more specific (elitist?) mindset to appriciate. To me, it was (and still is) a waste of time.