So I know ToB can break just about any build
Yeah, except not
Yeah, except not
Isn't there a reason its commonly refered to as the Tome of Broken...
I will repeat what has been said about ToB many times before. The core has classes far more broken the ToB could hope to be. They're called spellcasters. Honestly ToB characters are even overpowered for melee characters. The other melee characters are simply pathetically underpowered.
Except Pathfinders version of Paladin- it's awesome.
You can't use the same maneuver twice in a battle until you recharge your maneuvers. Period. And warblade can't use a maneuver the same turn he recharges. And don't make me state the obvious about crusaders.
I will repeat what has been said about ToB many times before. The core has classes far more broken the ToB could hope to be. They're called spellcasters. Honestly ToB characters are even overpowered for melee characters. The other melee characters are simply pathetically underpowered.
Except Pathfinders version of Paladin- it's awesome.
The brokenness of ToB is not something I was a arguing for I was just referencing other peoples opinions, I do think some of the things in it are strangely overpowered for melee classes, but really the only thing I don't like is the flavor of the classes as a whole.
they just dont mesh with me.
The brokenness of ToB is not something I was a arguing for I was just referencing other peoples opinions, I do think some of the things in it are strangely overpowered for melee classes, but really the only thing I don't like is the flavor of the classes as a whole.
they just dont mesh with me.
Melee is not overpowered hence ToB can't be broken it's as simple as that. If you don't like tha flavor don't use it but don't complain about it at CharOp either.
You can't use the same maneuver twice in a battle until you recharge your maneuvers. Period. And warblade can't use a maneuver the same turn he recharges. And don't make me state the obvious about crusaders.
I will repeat what has been said about ToB many times before. The core has classes far more broken the ToB could hope to be. They're called spellcasters. Honestly ToB characters are even overpowered for melee characters. The other melee characters are simply pathetically underpowered.
Except Pathfinders version of Paladin- it's awesome.
Yes but you've all seemed to miss the point that you're two different people
You can't use the same maneuver twice in a battle until you recharge your maneuvers. Period. And warblade can't use a maneuver the same turn he recharges. And don't make me state the obvious about crusaders.
I will repeat what has been said about ToB many times before. The core has classes far more broken the ToB could hope to be. They're called spellcasters. Honestly ToB characters are even overpowered for melee characters. The other melee characters are simply pathetically underpowered.
Ive got to agree with this. A Warblade is what a Fighter should have been, a Crusader what a Paladin should have been. A combination of a Swordsage and trapfinding with UMD and you got a rogue. The standard Melee core classes just couldnt compete to a full caster. Heck a TOB class cant compete with a caster once they hit 8th and 9th lvl spells.
One of the reasons I believe this to be true... extra books. You roll up a fighter or a rogue and you pretty much might use one or two feats or a prestige class or two from another book. You roll up a Wizard or a Cleric and every book that comes out has new spells. And its not like a fighters feats or a rogues skill points. When a new book came out for 3.5 if it had a cool feat its not like they could just replace it with something they already had unless the DM allowed it. If new cool spells came out.... the caster just goes and finds it or memorizes it the next day.
My point... the Core classes used to be more balanced when you had just the first 3 books. Once they started coming out with more and more books casters pulled way ahead. TOB simply makes a mellee character more even with a caster. In early lvls they are better, mid lvls even, and higher lvls underpowered but not as drasticly as most. Just my 2 copper.
Isn't there a reason its commonly refered to as the Tome of Broken...
That's a term that didn't enter common use till recently actually. I can't really recall it being used at all until this year in fact. It seems more of a fad than anything else.
Yes but you've all seemed to miss the point that you're two different people
Again as stated we would probably need more info on the race your talking about. If we cant see how these 2 people interact as one person we cant really give you an answer. The only thing we can sink our teeth into is your earlier comment about TOB, which by the way, I understand you wernt really arguing about.
If you can post up something more about the race we can see what it has to offer, but then most groups wont allow Dragon material anyways.
That's a term that didn't enter common use till recently actually. I can't really recall it being used at all until this year in fact. It seems more of a fad than anything else.
I believe it started by alot of people that dont own TOB and havent really taken a look at the book. TOB is a complicated book. If you take a cursory look at it or just see the lvl 20 builds people post up using TOB you might think the book to be broken, but once you take a look at the recovery methods vs a caster, or actually try building something with TOB you see it has its limits. ANY class in wow can be built to be broken as seen by these forums but that doesnt mean the class or book is broken. It just means we have alot of smart people here that use D&D as a mental exercise... like a puzzle.
I believe it started by alot of people that dont own TOB and havent really taken a look at the book. TOB is a complicated book. If you take a cursory look at it or just see the lvl 20 builds people post up using TOB you might think the book to be broken, but once you take a look at the recovery methods vs a caster, or actually try building something with TOB you see it has its limits. ANY class in wow can be built to be broken as seen by these forums but that doesnt mean the class or book is broken. It just means we have alot of smart people here that use D&D as a mental exercise... like a puzzle.
I don't disagree, but I think there's also the problem that less people are willing to come around and mention this to new posters. The current fad about it is just as much because less COers are around who are interested in talking about it as because of that view (which, lets be honest has pretty much existed since ToB material starting getting posted).
Honestly, ToB is one of the most internally consistent books as far as class power. The base clases are all solid tier 3 classes for good reason.
Melee is not overpowered hence ToB can't be broken it's as simple as that. If you don't like tha flavor don't use it but don't complain about it at CharOp either.
I think you misunderstood what I meant, In no way am I complaining about it, actually I agree that Melee characters are not over powered, What I meant was it make melee characters strangely stronger than they should be in comparison the the guy who warps the universe to his whims.
Magic Users will always be more powerful that fighters. Its just how the the laws of the universe work...mostly because mages rewrite those laws commonly.
From a game balance stand point it makes sense. However in a universe where magic reigns supreme...well, magic reigns supreme.
The warblade's recovery mechanic is laid out like this: Make a Swift action, then make a Standard action to make a single melee attack or perform a flourish. It explicitly states that you cannot execute a maneuver or change stances in the same turn as a recovery.
Basically, they're right about the middle of the power curve.
And no, your trick doesn't work at all.
JaronK
Yes but you've all seemed to miss the point that you're two different people
And you seem to have missed the point that your tactic requires both of your people, individually, to break the rules.
By the way, I never heard the term "Tome of Broken", but I'd assume that it's mostly a reaction from players who are so ingrained in the entire "casters are supposed to just beat the game after level 13, right?" mindset that they can't really deal with the ToB.
I also think that the swordsage's oriental flavor was really off-putting to a lot of people, and it blinded them to the more paladin-like flavor of crusaders, and the more fighter-ish flavor of warblades. I know whenever the one PC in my group who plays a crusader starts his round, the other players all call out "Gabe! Use your Jade Stallion Prancing Thrust Attack!", etc.
Again as stated we would probably need more info on the race your talking about. If we cant see how these 2 people interact as one person we cant really give you an answer. The only thing we can sink our teeth into is your earlier comment about TOB, which by the way, I understand you wernt really arguing about.
If you can post up something more about the race we can see what it has to offer, but then most groups wont allow Dragon material anyways.
I was in no way trying to argue anything about ToB like you said and everyone on here seems to just want to argue with each other, I was merely showing how you could create a character that takes infinite turns. It would depend on how your DM ran the character, which the Magazine says. The 2 beings split their HP and they can only be one class they both gain the same experience have the same amount of skill points and so on and so forth. It says there are two ways to play them in combat however. One is that they can both move their full base speed then only take one standard action. The other way is that they both get their own turn. They only have a level adjustment of +1 if they're ran the 1st way and a level adjustment of +2 if they're ran the other way. They're apperently smarter if they have the +2 level adjustment because they've opened their mind more or something like this. Thanks to everyone that has to be stupid about everything on this website and can't seem to see the humor in anything or be nice about it. O by the way, you could just only use white raven tatics and still take quite a few turns in a row. Go ahead and keep arguing by all means I'll just sit back and let you go back to being at each others throats over a game, have fun.
And you seem to have missed the point that your tactic requires both of your people, individually, to break the rules.
And you just seem to like to talk crap. I wasn't trying to start anthing but come on man, you talk like D&D is your life. THIS IS JUST A GAME! I merely had a funny idea I thought I'd share but everyone blew it out of proportion because I said you could break builds with ToB, which you really can if you look into it. You guys are certainly the people that give D&D it's bad name and the people that kill themselves over stupid things such as this. You're the people that seem to make people think I worship Satan because I play D&D. So thank you once again and good bye.
THIS IS JUST A GAME!
Yes, it's just a game. So when you come to a forum that deals specifically with the rules of the game to propose a tactic that is disallowed by the rules of that game, people are going to explain that your idea doesn't work.
At that point you can either concede the point graciously, make a reasoned argument for why your interpretation of the rules is correct, or chuck a hissy-fit. Guess which one you're doing?
Yes, it's just a game. So when you come to a forum that deals specifically with the rules of the game to propose a tactic that is disallowed by the rules of that game, people are going to explain that your idea doesn't work.
At that point you can either concede the point graciously, make a reasoned argument for why your interpretation of the rules is correct, or chuck a hissy-fit. Guess which one you're doing?
Yes but let us analyze how you can also give out information: by being nice and trying to help or by being a dick, which are you doing?
Yes but let us analyze how you can also give out information: by being nice and trying to help or by being a dick, which are you doing?
Translation: "No, YOU!"
Translation: "No, YOU!"
Did you even think about your response?
And you just seem to like to talk crap. I wasn't trying to start anthing but come on man, you talk like D&D is your life. THIS IS JUST A GAME! I merely had a funny idea I thought I'd share but everyone blew it out of proportion because I said you could break builds with ToB, which you really can if you look into it. You guys are certainly the people that give D&D it's bad name and the people that kill themselves over stupid things such as this. You're the people that seem to make people think I worship Satan because I play D&D. So thank you once again and good bye.
lol are you being serious? Because this has got to be one of the craziest outburst Ive seen on these forums. I usually see well thought out and articulate responses on this forum. Its one of the reasons I usually post here. Guys like you need to be posting on espn or trucker pull websites where the rest of the 10 year olds and tards seem to congregate. And if the people around you believe you worship Satan for playing this game... there probably already there posting away. Have fun and stop giving US a bad name will ya.
I.E. 1984
-Twin 1 does a full round action then uses White Raven Tactics on Twin 2.
-While Twin 2 does his thing, Twin 1 refreshes then Twin 2 uses WRT on Twin 1.
-Continue as prudent.
One major limiting factor is that the target of WRT loses 1 from his initiative count. You may get many turns, but if you don't actually nullify the threat, your opposition WILL get a turn.
After they act, however, the initiative decrease potentially goes to negative infinity. They get infinite turns and a typical DM chastises you for doing something like this.
I was in no way trying to argue anything about ToB like you said and everyone on here seems to just want to argue with each other, I was merely showing how you could create a character that takes infinite turns. It would depend on how your DM ran the character, which the Magazine says. The 2 beings split their HP and they can only be one class they both gain the same experience have the same amount of skill points and so on and so forth. It says there are two ways to play them in combat however. One is that they can both move their full base speed then only take one standard action. The other way is that they both get their own turn. They only have a level adjustment of +1 if they're ran the 1st way and a level adjustment of +2 if they're ran the other way. They're apperently smarter if they have the +2 level adjustment because they've opened their mind more or something like this. Thanks to everyone that has to be stupid about everything on this website and can't seem to see the humor in anything or be nice about it. O by the way, you could just only use white raven tatics and still take quite a few turns in a row. Go ahead and keep arguing by all means I'll just sit back and let you go back to being at each others throats over a game, have fun.
you know that would all be pretty cool, you know
IF IT WAS IN THE BOOK
but it isn't, so it's not, so your a liar, and you should feel bad. Now go away
Let's assume somehow you have a Dvati Swordsage (or someone with Adaptive Style) with White Raven Tactics. The twins stand no more than 10' apart from each other, allowing them to WRT each other.
-Twin 1 does a full round action then uses White Raven Tactics on Twin 2.
-While Twin 2 does his thing, Twin 1 refreshes then Twin 2 uses WRT on Twin 1.
-Continue as prudent.
One major limiting factor is that the target of WRT loses 1 from his initiative count. You may get many turns, but if you don't actually nullify the threat, your opposition WILL get a turn.
After they act, however, the initiative decrease potentially goes to negative infinity. They get infinite turns and a typical DM chastises you for doing something like this.
Anybody know the location of the rules text that points out the cap for delaying initiative before it becomes another round? Did they not carry that from 3.0 to 3.5?
Dvati = Awesome in almost all melee classes.
BUT what you want doesn't work. Reason being Dvati share / split uses of all class features (such as spells per day) and would be limited to the one round one manuever. I say this cause, I use a manuever, it is gone from our shared list, now I need to recover it but we used it.
Hopefully that makes sense. Also fun thing I wanted to do was whirling frenzy drudic avenger riding his wildshaped twin into battle. Or always the fiend of corruption.
Also fun thing I wanted to do was whirling frenzy drudic avenger riding his wildshaped twin into battle. Or always the fiend of corruption.
POSSESS EACH OTHER AT THE SAME TIME ZOMG :P
Wait...
lol are you being serious? Because this has got to be one of the craziest outburst Ive seen on these forums. I usually see well thought out and articulate responses on this forum. Its one of the reasons I usually post here. Guys like you need to be posting on espn or trucker pull websites where the rest of the 10 year olds and tards seem to congregate. And if the people around you believe you worship Satan for playing this game... there probably already there posting away. Have fun and stop giving US a bad name will ya.
Are you being serious??? Well thought out and articulate? 'Translation: "No, YOU!"' "And you seem to have missed the point that your tactic requires both of your people, individually, to break the rules." "Isn't there a reason its commonly refered to as the Tome of Broken..." "Without having the information on the Dvati in front of me, all I can say is you cannot use a maneuver in a round you recover, as directly called out in the warblade recovery mechanic. You also cannot get more than 1 swift action in a round, so..." Now these are only quotes from this thread that exemplify my point, the last one was yes well thought out but I want to point out that if you don't take a move action most DM's will let you take 2 swift actions. I'm sorry that I can not reach you're high level of mentality Mr. Dragonamedrake and that I'm giving YOU a bad name. Look at the thread, I asked people to take a little look and they blew the entire thing out of proportion. I think I have a right to an outburst. You guys treat everyone who makes one little mistake like they're the stupidest person in the world because they havn't read every little detail in all 1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 books that wizards has published.
you know that would all be pretty cool, you know
IF IT WAS IN THE BOOK
but it isn't, so it's not, so your a liar, and you should feel bad. Now go away
You know it'd also be cool if you looked here http://forums.gleemax.com/wotc_archive/index.php/t-772268.html
I want to point out that if you don't take a move action most DM's will let you take 2 swift actions.
No. No, no, no, no no. Swift Actions are more important than move actions for a very large amount of classes.
I'm sorry that I can not reach you're high level of mentality Mr. Dragonamedrake and that I'm giving YOU a bad name. Look at the thread, I asked people to take a little look and they blew the entire thing out of proportion. I think I have a right to an outburst. You guys treat everyone who makes one little mistake like they're the stupidest person in the world because they havn't read every little detail in all 1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 books that wizards has published.
I think you should relax and accept the fact that you've made some mistakes. The only 'broken' things here are the terribly written Dvati race from, of course, Dragon, and the way in which several people in this thread interpret rules. You should gracefully admit when you've made a mistake. This is pointless, illogical, and perhaps a mediocre trolling attempt, at best.
POSSESS EACH OTHER AT THE SAME TIME ZOMG :P
Wait...
Or possess the sword while one twin uses it, or Possess the sword and armor of the crazy barb. Take over his soul and keep the body. Have Ur Priest / Fiend of Corruption.
Are you being serious??? Well thought out and articulate? 'Translation: "No, YOU!"' "And you seem to have missed the point that your tactic requires both of your people, individually, to break the rules." "Isn't there a reason its commonly refered to as the Tome of Broken..." "Without having the information on the Dvati in front of me, all I can say is you cannot use a maneuver in a round you recover, as directly called out in the warblade recovery mechanic. You also cannot get more than 1 swift action in a round, so..." Now these are only quotes from this thread that exemplify my point, the last one was yes well thought out but I want to point out that if you don't take a move action most DM's will let you take 2 swift actions. I'm sorry that I can not reach you're high level of mentality Mr. Dragonamedrake and that I'm giving YOU a bad name. Look at the thread, I asked people to take a little look and they blew the entire thing out of proportion. I think I have a right to an outburst. You guys treat everyone who makes one little mistake like they're the stupidest person in the world because they havn't read every little detail in all 1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 books that wizards has published.
I'd just like to point out that I have made minor mistakes as well and it's never degraded into such a pointless argument.
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1184123
No. No, no, no, no no. Swift Actions are more important than move actions for a very large amount of classes..
My DM does. He always let's us take an action and substitute it with the shorter one. A standard action can become a move action, like for running, you need two move actions, and a move action can become a swift, and you already have as many free actions as you need. The only thing we can't get to is immediate actions.
My DM does. He always let's us take an action and substitute it with the shorter one. A standard action can become a move action, like for running, you need two move actions, and a move action can become a swift, and you already have as many free actions as you need. The only thing we can't get to is immediate actions.
Huh, interesting. None of my DMs ever have, and there are so many yummy uses of swift actions. Regardless, the character relies on poor dragon material and house rules, then.
Thanks for the input, though.
Huh, interesting. None of my DMs ever have, and there are so many yummy uses of swift actions. Regardless, the character relies on poor dragon material and house rules, then.
Thanks for the input, though.
Same for my DM actually because its only logical.
Like using my swift action for Boots of Sidestepping and then using my move action to cast feather fall....
Like if I stepped off a cliff or something, makes sense to me. Because the reason its a swift action is that it requires less exertion than a move action so a move action would be more than sufficient to use a swift action.
Obviously this needs to be adjudicated carefully, but then again my DM will just straight up say no if you pull something heinous. Hell even if the rules back you up if he thinks its too powerful he just says no, you can't do that. Why not? Because I said so.
Post so that I can have a place in this thread before it gets locked. :P
I dunno I think maybe the other conversations going on here might actually let this thread live... well probably not.
I dunno I think maybe the other conversations going on here might actually let this thread live... well probably not.
We can save it! It all depends on whether or not the race gives you multiple turns or not I think. If it doesn't then you've already used a maneuver and can't recover in the same turn. BREATHE WILLY BREATHE!!! *Throws water on the dying thread*
If you take the race out of Dragon yes you can only take 1 turn, if you take the race out off the internet on the creaters website you get 2 turns
Can you link us to the info on the creator's website?
http://paizo.com/dragon/messageboards/compendium/dvatiDuetsAndOtherConundrums
This may or may not help as well
http://www.talonart.com/Dvati-2ndEd.pdf
Are you being serious??? Well thought out and articulate? 'Translation: "No, YOU!"' " I'm sorry that I can not reach you're high level of mentality Mr. Dragonamedrake and that I'm giving YOU a bad name. Look at the thread, I asked people to take a little look and they blew the entire thing out of proportion. I think I have a right to an outburst. You guys treat everyone who makes one little mistake like they're the stupidest person in the world because they havn't read every little detail in all 1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 books that wizards has published.
I dont believe I was rude whatsoever in any of my earlier post. In fact I was trying to be helpful. Not untill I saw the feces spewing forth about killing oneself and worshiping satan... something you would see often on a WOW forum or something, did I get off topic. That was rediculous. Either way Im done arguing as it feeds the trolls.
Pretty much I think this argument will fall to the DM and how he interpretes the race and TOB mechanics. I think it doesnt work RAW but then Im not your DM. Good luck and I hope that the this thread comes up with something actually usefull.
I dont believe I was rude whatsoever in any of my earlier post. In fact I was trying to be helpful. Not untill I saw the feces spewing forth about killing oneself and worshiping satan... something you would see often on a WOW forum or something, did I get off topic. That was rediculous. Either way Im done arguing as it feeds the trolls.
Pretty much I think this argument will fall to the DM and how he interpretes the race and TOB mechanics. I think it doesnt work RAW but then Im not your DM. Good luck and I hope that the this thread comes up with something actually usefull.
You don't believe you were rude? *raises an eyebrow* what's this then: "Guys like you need to be posting on espn or trucker pull websites where the rest of the 10 year olds and tards seem to congregate." You say you're done arguing because it feeds trolls, I say you guys on here that say that are trolls that have had enough to eat.
Huh, interesting. None of my DMs ever have, and there are so many yummy uses of swift actions. Regardless, the character relies on poor dragon material and house rules, then.
Thanks for the input, though.
I just realized I was thinking of a free action and not a swift action lol :/ that still doesn't justify some of the people responding the way they did *cough cough* Dandu *cough cough*
I think you should relax and accept the fact that you've made some mistakes. The only 'broken' things here are the terribly written Dvati race from, of course, Dragon, and the way in which several people in this thread interpret rules.
*cough cough* And Felgoroth's grammar *cough cough*
Seriously,
You say you're done arguing because it feeds trolls, I say you guys on here that say that are trolls that have had enough to eat.
What does that even mean?
I think I have a right to an outburst.
And I think I have a right to NO U!
What are you doing?
If we don't re-immerse the thread in intellectual content it will suffocate, get locked, and die.
Isn't there a reason its commonly refered to as the Tome of Broken...
Sure there is. Doesn't mean that it's a good reason.
I think you misunderstood what I meant, In no way am I complaining about it, actually I agree that Melee characters are not over powered, What I meant was it make melee characters strangely stronger than they should be in comparison the the guy who warps the universe to his whims.
Magic Users will always be more powerful that fighters. Its just how the the laws of the universe work...mostly because mages rewrite those laws commonly.
I'm not sure where to start, so I'm just going to beat you upside the head with a rolled up newspaper until you concede that your point is wrong.
I'm not sure where to start, so I'm just going to beat you upside the head with a rolled up newspaper until you concede that your point is wrong.
I'm sure your little argument with another fellow on this same thread got you all riled up but I have my opinion and there is no reason to continue past disagreeing with me. That being said.
My point is wrong? Really? So from your standpoint a Fighter should be as powerful as a Caster? Really?
Melee builds fit their niche' nicely but there is no reason they(besides game balance) that they should be anywhere near as powerful as a caster.
It's brains > brawn. I don't like ToB and it's mostly because of a personal bias on my part, but what I said was not wrong.
The point your asking me to concede is not wrong,
Casters are stronger than Melee Classes.
My point is wrong? Really? So from your standpoint a Fighter should be as powerful as a Caster? Really?
From a balance standpoint, yes?
Melee builds fit their niche' nicely but there is no reason they(besides game balance) that they should be anywhere near as powerful as a caster.
And game balance is what matters in a game, right?
It's brains > brawn. I don't like ToB and it's mostly because of a personal bias on my part, but what I said was not wrong.
Spellcasting from Sorcerers is hardly reliant on Brains, and Warblades make good Int fighters. So clearly, Warblades should triumph over Sorcerers
The point your asking me to concede is not wrong,
Casters are stronger than Melee Classes.
The point was whether they should be or not. Don't forget your own points.
@op - are you still there? Not all of us are heartless jerks, really. Stay for a while, write more on the subject and I can guarantee that this thread will be full of helpful advice very soon.
Oh, pardon me on my somewhat strange language - English is not my first one ;)
The point was whether they should be or not. Don't forget your own points.
Perhaps I should have gone over the fact that I wasn't talking about game balance rather than realism, then this discussion never would have arouse. My own point was Casters are better than Melee and they should be. Either way I didn't forget my point I was just missed a critical piece of information, which is that I'm not talking about from a gameplay aspect, that being said sorry for the confusion.
Also Sorcs may not be based on INT but in the end they learn spells based on what is tactically sound and Sorcs have better resources than Melee characters.(Once again me not expressing myself all that well.)
I'm sure your little argument with another fellow on this same thread got you all riled up but I have my opinion and there is no reason to continue past disagreeing with me. That being said.
My point is wrong? Really? So from your standpoint a Fighter should be as powerful as a Caster? Really?
Melee builds fit their niche' nicely but there is no reason they(besides game balance) that they should be anywhere near as powerful as a caster.
It's brains > brawn. I don't like ToB and it's mostly because of a personal bias on my part, but what I said was not wrong.
The point your asking me to concede is not wrong,
Casters are stronger than Melee Classes.
Yes a Fighter should be as powerful as a caster. Of course man. Its a game and as such each class should be on equal footing with all other classes. However they are not... this isnt being disputed on this thread. TOB simply puts melee on a little bit better footing but they are still sorely underpowered vs casters.
I understand that different prestige classes and class combo's make each class different, but the problem 3rd Ed has always had is the power casters have. Its been this way so long people tend to think this in intended. It wasnt and its not the case in 4th ed... the disaster that it is imo.
Originally Posted by felgoroth
You don't believe you were rude? *raises an eyebrow* what's this then: "Guys like you need to be posting on espn or trucker pull websites where the rest of the 10 year olds and tards seem to congregate." You say you're done arguing because it feeds trolls, I say you guys on here that say that are trolls that have had enough to eat.
Can you read man. I said I hadnt been rude in my earlier post. Your really starting to whine. And that last sentence... Good lord.
Perhaps I should have gone over the fact that I wasn't talking about game balance rather than realism
Realism, in a game about magical firebreathing, flying lizards? About ways of altering reality that don't, and have never, existed?
then this discussion never would have arouse. My own point was Casters are better than Melee and they should be.
Why? Because of realism? But in the real word, people can't do magic, so having magic is inherently unrealistic. Having it stronger, weaker, or equal to melee in power is not unrealistic is any case.
Also, NO U!
Realism, in a game about magical firebreathing, flying lizards? About ways of altering reality that don't, and have never, existed?
Why?
This is gonna be the most scientific and logical argument anyone has ever heard in the history of forever :P but
Magic is Magical...
Yes, but you're treating a symptom while the disease rages on, consumes the thread. The fish rots from the head, so they say. So I'm thinking, why not cut off the head?
... the head of the
its been done you've beaten the horse to death
and if i had the pic of the dead horse being i would post that to show hwo stupid this thread is
MOD LOCK THIS THREAD BEFORE IT IMPLODES YOUR SOUL!
Flawless_P, Dandu - PLEASE!
It's supposed to be ironic in the post-modernist sense as well as a commentary on society.
Thank you, Calvin. What does Hobbes have to say?