Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 91 to 110 of 110
  1. - Top - End - #91
    Bugbear in the Playground
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location

    Default Re: The Reason for Imbalance in D20

    Quote Originally Posted by Oslecamo View Post
    So let me see if I can get this straight: the majority of the players wants a brainless game where a 5 year old who barely knows how to read and is playing for the first time will fare as well as the 20 year university guy who played the game for half his life?
    You can teach a 5 year old the rules of chess. There are no surprises, tricks, or misleading information in the rules of chess.

    Oddly, that seems to have virtually no impact on how much experience makes one a good chess player.

    What we are trying to say is that people should get better at the game by playing the game, not by reading the rules.

  2. - Top - End - #92
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    AKA_Bait's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Albany, NY
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The Reason for Imbalance in D20

    Wow... talk about hubris.

    Gee Monte, perhaps there's a reason that WotC didn't seem to try all that hard to keep you from leaving the fold and starting your own company eh?

    Look, I don't have a problem with a system that has design and balance issues. I don't have a problem with some cards in a CCG being better than others (that's partly how you push value for the uncommon and rare cards).

    I do have an issue with the assumption about a system you are designing that "hey, I guess we better make up some flaws so serious players can feel smart." Because guess what, there are going to be flaws and imbalances anyway. Doing that on purpose is just asking for the kind of wild imbalance bettween classes that d20 suffers from. Thinking the system won't provide that just by itself and by the designers being human... pretty arrogant.
    Last edited by AKA_Bait; 2008-05-07 at 12:01 AM.
    So You Wanna Be A DM? A Potentially Helpful Guide
    Truly wonderful avatar made by Cuthalion

    Live in NYC? Check out the New York City Meetup Planning Thread.

  3. - Top - End - #93
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Behold_the_Void's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Piercing the heavens!
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The Reason for Imbalance in D20

    Quote Originally Posted by Yahzi View Post
    You can teach a 5 year old the rules of chess. There are no surprises, tricks, or misleading information in the rules of chess.

    Oddly, that seems to have virtually no impact on how much experience makes one a good chess player.

    What we are trying to say is that people should get better at the game by playing the game, not by reading the rules.
    By the same token, they shouldn't print bad rules in a rulebook.


    Incredibly GAR avatar by Ninja_Chocobo.

  4. - Top - End - #94
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Kurald Galain's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2007

    Default Re: The Reason for Imbalance in D20

    First, big friggin' duh. Hello? Anyone who hadn't figured this out, like, ten years ago? And yes, I'm aware that 3E wasn't out yet ten years ago.

    Second, it's just a typical "cover your word-for-donkey-I'm-not-allowed-to-write-on-the-forums". "Yes, we put those bad things there intentionally, really, it's by design!!!1!"

    Third, reading more closely, he doesn't understand the purpose of Timmy cards. No, it is not to let people figure out that other cards are better (although Magic does have a few cards like that, such as the Iron Star). Timmy cards exist because many Magic players like to whack their opponent with 10/10 trample monsters. More importantly, they let you.

    On the other hand, the monk class does not exist because many players like using unarmed combat, because (1) there are several other ways of accomplishing that, and (2) more importantly, the class doesn't let you.
    Last edited by Kurald Galain; 2008-05-07 at 04:59 AM.
    Guide to the Magus, the Pathfinder Gish class.

    "I would really like to see a game made by Obryn, Kurald Galain, and Knaight from these forums. I'm not joking one bit. I would buy the hell out of that." -- ChubbyRain
    Crystal Shard Studios - Freeware games designed by Kurald and others!

  5. - Top - End - #95
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Matthew's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Kanagawa, Japan
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The Reason for Imbalance in D20

    Quote Originally Posted by Kurald Galain View Post
    First, big friggin' duh. Hello? Anyone who hadn't figured this out, like, ten years ago? And yes, I'm aware that 3E wasn't out yet ten years ago.

    Second, it's just a typical "cover your word-for-donkey-I'm-not-allowed-to-write-on-the-forums". "Yes, we put those bad things there intentionally, really, it's by design!!!1!"
    That seems a little contradictory... So, are you saying we should have figured out the game was designed to be unbalanced on purpose after playing it for a while and that this is a lie, so it wasn't intentionally designed to be unbalanced at all. I'm confused.

    I knew D20 was unbalanced, what I didn't know was that it was designed that way on purpose (whether or not it really was is something people will have to make up their own minds about).

    Quote Originally Posted by Kurald Galain View Post
    Third, reading more closely, he doesn't understand the purpose of Timmy cards. No, it is not to let people figure out that other cards are better (although Magic does have a few cards like that, such as the Iron Star). Timmy cards exist because many Magic players like to whack their opponent with 10/10 trample monsters. More importantly, they let you.

    On the other hand, the monk class does not exist because many players like using unarmed combat, because (1) there are several other ways of accomplishing that, and (2) more importantly, the class doesn't let you.
    Unfortunately, even if he misunderstands what Timmy Cards are for, that doesn't mean that they didn't apply the idea to D&D, it means that they didn't understand the idea they thought they were applying.
    Last edited by Matthew; 2008-05-07 at 05:41 AM.
    It is a joyful thing indeed to hold intimate converse with a man after one’s own heart, chatting without reserve about things of interest or the fleeting topics of the world; but such, alas, are few and far between.

    – Yoshida Kenko (1283-1350), Tsurezure-Gusa (1340)

  6. - Top - End - #96
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    The sunny South
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The Reason for Imbalance in D20

    Quote Originally Posted by Kurald Galain View Post
    First, big friggin' duh. Hello? Anyone who hadn't figured this out, like, ten years ago? And yes, I'm aware that 3E wasn't out yet ten years ago.

    Second, it's just a typical "cover your word-for-donkey-I'm-not-allowed-to-write-on-the-forums". "Yes, we put those bad things there intentionally, really, it's by design!!!1!.
    Ironically this post seems laced with the very same flavours as Monty's

    perhaps Monty was right after all.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lilly View Post
    I am now going to begin blaming everything that goes wrong on Charity. Just for gits and shiggles. And not even just things on the forums. Summer! Charity!

  7. - Top - End - #97
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    horseboy's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The Reason for Imbalance in D20

    Quote Originally Posted by Kompera;4288968
    I quit playing GW games when I purchased a pile of their miniatures which were being offered for sale at their eponymously named store. Hey, they [b
    never[/b] had a sale before, I dropped a bundle. I even remarked on the unprecedented sale to the two clerks in the store. "You guys never run sales, what's up?" "Oh, nothing really." I then spent hours painting my new miniatures. And then I showed up to play in one of their evening games hosted in their stores. And was told that they had released a new miniature line and that no one could play with the "old" miniatures in their store. Regardless of the fact that they had been purchased there.
    Weird. I was using their old Marauder line plague censor bearers and one piece clan rats in tournaments last year at the bunker and no one said anything to me about it. When was this?

    Quote Originally Posted by Avor View Post
    The other thing I hate is as DM, players who "master" a single class, know all the ins and outs, how to abuse the hell out of it. Then ask me if it's ok, saying it's just a melee class. The DM needs to know all the rules, that's alot of work, they simply don't have the time or effort to focus on each and every class to learn it inside and out.
    That's why we have the "No repeat offenders" rule. I'm never allowed to ever play mounted fighter, ever again in any system. Moose is never allowed to play a mage or a ranger, we mastered them.

    And if you have to have developers leave you powerful combos in the game for you to find, you're not nearly as cleaver as you want to believe about yourself.
    Alot is not a word. It's a lot, two words.
    Always use the proper tool. If the proper tool isn't available, try a hammer.


  8. - Top - End - #98
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Kurald Galain's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2007

    Default Re: The Reason for Imbalance in D20

    It occured to me that the main difference is this:

    Once you find out that a Magic card is sub-par, you wait a few minutes for the game to end, and then remove it from your deck.

    Once you find out that a D&D class, race, skill, feat, or feature (or spell, for sorcerers) is sub-par, your character is essentially stuck with it forever.

    Unless the DM allows the PHB2 retraining rules or the Dark Chaos trick, which were written years after 3.0 was first released, so that really is not an excuse.
    Guide to the Magus, the Pathfinder Gish class.

    "I would really like to see a game made by Obryn, Kurald Galain, and Knaight from these forums. I'm not joking one bit. I would buy the hell out of that." -- ChubbyRain
    Crystal Shard Studios - Freeware games designed by Kurald and others!

  9. - Top - End - #99

    Default Re: The Reason for Imbalance in D20

    Quote Originally Posted by Vortling View Post
    I've actually seen this before. I assume some people are going to get mad about it.
    The quote's being taken radically out of context. And, frankly, the bit where he explicitly says D&D doesn't do what Magic does is being completely ignored. For example, just a few paragraphs later:

    Quote Originally Posted by Monte Cook's blog
    To continue to use the simplistic example above, the Toughness feat could have been written to make it clear that it was for 1st-level elf wizards (where it is likely to give them a 100 percent increase in hit points). It's also handy when you know you're playing a one-shot session with 1st-level characters, like at a convention (you sure don't want to take item creation feats in such an instance, for example).
    What Cook is talking about is the incontrovertible fact that any game which features meaningful choices will, as a matter of course, feature non-optimal combinations of those choices. The subject of his entire blog post was not about "deliberately designed brokenness", it was about a failure in 3rd Edition to include meaningful advice for new players in the rulebooks.

    Toughness wasn't an optimal feat for PCs in long-term campaigns. But it had a definite role in low-level one-shots or for buffing low-level NPCs. As Cook says: Toughness had its uses.

    His other example are the magic item creation feats: Useful in many long-term campaigns, completely useless in one-shots or in campaigns with insufficient downtime. Those aren't bad or broken feats -- they're just feats which are more useful in some situations than in others and knowing which requires a mastery of the system.

    And I know that 4th Edition is promising that the bad ol' days in which players could make sub-optimal choices while building their characters are dead and gone. 4th Edition is lying to you: If there are any meaningful choices in the game, then sub-optimal choices are going to be possible. It is an unavoidable and incontrovertible fact.

    Take Chess, for example. Perfectly balanced, right? Great. You open with an A2-A3 pawn move and I'll open with a classic Queen's Gambit. Or you open the game by moving your "horsey" five times in a row while I'm carefully developing the center of the board.

    But let's imagine that 4th Edition has achieved the impossible and created a perfect balance in their hundreds of different powers so that, no matter which powers you take, you always remain perfectly balanced with every other option available.

    Now, we'll both take the same standard stats and build a fighter. I'm putting my highest score into Intelligence. You're putting yours into Strength. Who's gong to have the better fighter? ("Maybe they've included Int-based fighter powers!" I don't take them. I take the Strength-based ones. Maybe I've got a concept. Maybe I'm like the 3rd Edition newbie who doesn't understand what Toughness is and isn't useful for.)

    Frankly, the fact that the 4th Edition designers actually think they can eliminate sub-optimal choices is one of the things which makes me most question their basic competency in game design.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dervag View Post
    I heard that the source of the problem was this:

    3rd Edition was originally playtested by a very small group of people whose idea of how the classes were meant to be played was very stereotyped. Wizards were blasters.
    3rd Edition featured one of the largest playtests in the history of the industry. Assuming the recently released 4th Edition playtest list is comprehensive, the 3rd Edition playtest was larger.

  10. - Top - End - #100
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Matthew's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Kanagawa, Japan
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The Reason for Imbalance in D20

    Quote Originally Posted by Justin_Bacon View Post
    The quote's being taken radically out of context. And, frankly, the bit where he explicitly says D&D doesn't do what Magic does is being completely ignored. For example, just a few paragraphs later:
    I don't think so. The context is linked right there. The quotation may be read out of context, but that's the nature of quotations. It's also false to say that he "explicitly says D&D doesn't do what Magic does" or even that it is being ignored. He says "D&D doesn't exactly do" what Magic the Gathering does with regard to 'Timmy Cards', which I think should be perfectly obvious to anybody.

    Quote Originally Posted by Justin_Bacon View Post
    What Cook is talking about is the incontrovertible fact that any game which features meaningful choices will, as a matter of course, feature non-optimal combinations of those choices. The subject of his entire blog post was not about "deliberately designed brokenness", it was about a failure in 3rd Edition to include meaningful advice for new players in the rulebooks.
    That is indeed the subject of his blog, but he clearly says that they purposefully didn't "design it [suboptimal choices] away" in order to "reward mastery of the game". It's pretty clear that many character creation and other choices were designed with arbitrary 'good and bad' options.

    You are quite right that 4e will not be likely able to design all of these things away and that it will no doubt introduce new imbalances as part and parcel of its development. However, the designers are claiming to be making every effort to remove arbitrary suboptimal choices from the game (whether we believe them or not).

    For me there are really only two issues here. 1) Feats, Spells, Skills, Equipment [and some other undefined aspects of the game] are not balanced so that one choice is equal to another 2) The game was intentionally designed that way to reward 'rules mastery'.

    I am certainly not judging this approach in absolute terms, but I certainly know that it subjectively is not for me. As I say, if I had known that the game was designed so that some choices are better than others, I [and I assume others like me] wouldn't have bothered seeking to redress those rules we perceived as flaws.
    It is a joyful thing indeed to hold intimate converse with a man after one’s own heart, chatting without reserve about things of interest or the fleeting topics of the world; but such, alas, are few and far between.

    – Yoshida Kenko (1283-1350), Tsurezure-Gusa (1340)

  11. - Top - End - #101

    Default Re: The Reason for Imbalance in D20

    Quote Originally Posted by Matthew View Post
    For me there are really only two issues here. 1) Feats, Spells, Skills, Equipment [and some other undefined aspects of the game] are not balanced so that one choice is equal to another
    They are not balanced so that one choice is equal to another for all characters in all situations.

    They can't be.

    That's what Monte Cook wrote. Taking his quotes out of context and distorting his words won't change that fact.

  12. - Top - End - #102
    Banned
     
    Rutee's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Gender
    Female

    Default Re: The Reason for Imbalance in D20

    HIs words were "We deliberately wrote bad options into the rules to reward Rules Mastery". He then goes onto say "Some of these bad options can be useful at times, but in general are just traps"

    At what point were we twisting?

  13. - Top - End - #103
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    DwarfClericGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2007

    Default Re: The Reason for Imbalance in D20

    Quote Originally Posted by Kurald Galain View Post
    It occured to me that the main difference is this:

    Once you find out that a Magic card is sub-par, you wait a few minutes for the game to end, and then remove it from your deck.

    Once you find out that a D&D class, race, skill, feat, or feature (or spell, for sorcerers) is sub-par, your character is essentially stuck with it forever.

    Unless the DM allows the PHB2 retraining rules or the Dark Chaos trick, which were written years after 3.0 was first released, so that really is not an excuse.
    Why the hell do you need a damn rule book to give you permision to retcon your character? Thats totaly obsurd. Ive reworked characters many times when Ive found out the skill/feat set I took turned out to eather totaly suck or I saw a better way to express my character consept with a different skill/feat set, or even class. My GM did not say "no there are not rules to fix a character your just screwd deal with it." Insted my GM just said "your right. You really farked over your character. Tell me what you want to do." Then give suggestions that he thought might help.

    Sorry if this was a rant but this kinda erked me. Kurald Im sorry if this sounds like im picking on you. That is not im intention. I did read the retraining rules and found them very dumb.

  14. - Top - End - #104
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Matthew's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Kanagawa, Japan
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The Reason for Imbalance in D20

    Quote Originally Posted by Justin_Bacon View Post
    They are not balanced so that one choice is equal to another for all characters in all situations.

    They can't be.

    That's what Monte Cook wrote. Taking his quotes out of context and distorting his words won't change that fact.
    That is not what he says, and once again I am not taking his quotes out of context, the context is right there for all to read. There is a huge difference between admitting that some things are good in one situation and some things are good in another, and saying we purposefully made some choices significantly worse than others (ala 'Timmy Cards') in order to reward 'rules mastery'.

    Yes, some Feats have very minor niches where they are 'good'; I have argued that many times over the years in defence of things like Weapon Focus and, indeed, Toughness, but you cannot seriously be telling me that something like Weapon Specialisation is a good Feat to take at Fourth Level or Whirlwind Attack is a good feat to aim for, still less that Exotic Weapon Proficiency - Bastard Sword is a wise investment of a Feat or that Half Plate/Splint Mail is a worthwhile armour choice. These are just bad options with only the slightest merit to them.

    To put it another way, if someone were to say "I want to play a Level 1 Fighter who fights with two Long Swords" that is generally recognised as a 'bad choice'. That means that D20 doesn't support the concept 'Level 1 Fighter who fights effectively with two Long Swords.' What is the reason for this? It is apparently to reward players who realise it's a 'bad choice'. In my (subjective) opinion that is, frankly, stupid and not what I want from an adventure roleplaying game. The Animated Shield is a similar 'would be crazy to do without' high level item. The whole idea pretty much epitomises what I despise about D20, but also what other people love - builds and level resource management.

    You are ignoring the facts about D20 and, indeed, the very words of one of its three lead designers.
    Last edited by Matthew; 2008-05-12 at 06:47 PM.
    It is a joyful thing indeed to hold intimate converse with a man after one’s own heart, chatting without reserve about things of interest or the fleeting topics of the world; but such, alas, are few and far between.

    – Yoshida Kenko (1283-1350), Tsurezure-Gusa (1340)

  15. - Top - End - #105
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Lizardfolk

    Join Date
    Sep 2007

    Default Re: The Reason for Imbalance in D20

    Quote Originally Posted by Oslecamo View Post
    Wait, we may have an important discuss point here.

    In wich way having a weacker character hinders you from roleplaying?


    This is, even if you're playing a commoner with 8 in all his stats and who wields a broken club, what makes that character harder to roleplay thant Mike the prodigiy wizard who rolled 18s in all his stats?
    It's not harder to roleplay that. It's trivially easy. Here, I'll give a hypothetical example of play. The commoner with all 8s for stats and the broken club we'll call 'Barrelmaker", the name GMs in a club I was a member of would give to characters they would allow the player to re-roll. The rest will just be represented by their class.

    The group of our heroes is in a dungeon, and is attacked by a several goblins:
    Mage: I'll Sleep the group on the left! (spell effect is resolved, a few Goblins fall asleep)
    Fighter: I'll charge the lead Goblin on the right! (combat roll is resolved, damage dealt, and a Goblin dies)
    Barrelmaker: I'll charge the Goblin next to that one! (Combat roll is resolved, attack missed)
    Cleric: (to Barrelmaker) "I thought I told you to stay out of combat? I use far too many healing spells trying to keep you alive." *sigh* I charge the Goblin Barrelmaker charged, so I might save his rear, again, when he is hit. (combat roll is resolved, Goblin is injured)

    Later in town, the group needs to get information from the head of the town guards:
    Barrelmaker: I'll go talk to him.
    Everyone else: No! OOC: With your 8 CHA and pitiful skills you'll probably get us thrown in gaol. And even if you don't manage to offend, you won't be getting any useful information. Sure wish we had a Rogue... Cleric will go, he has the highest CHA.

    Later, in the wilderness, the party needs to flee on horseback from a group of Ogres:
    GM: Make Riding rolls to pull ahead of the Ogres.
    <everyone passes except Barrelmaker>
    GM: You're caught and eaten. Everyone else escapes.

    Yeah, I fiated all of the rolls for purposes of this example. Maybe Barrelmaker would have accomplished something. It's possible. But the point is that such a character, while being perfectly able to be role played, is also not going to be as effective as any other person in the group, at anything. And while some might find that challenging and a role play bonanza, most people would find it frustrating, boring, and not fun at all. And your group might not appreciate the uselessness of your character, either, preferring, you know, to hang out with their equals. But feel free to tag along with them, tend the camp fire, curry the horses, and cook the meals. You'll be lousy at those tasks, too, but at least you'll be role playing, right?

    So knock yourself out with your Barrelmaker. Just remember that while D&D is a role playing game, it is still a game. And games are meant to be fun, or there's little point in playing them. As Bruce Lee would say: "Role playing is like a finger, pointing towards the moon. Focus on the finger, and you'll miss all of that heavenly glory" *smack*

    Re: GW. I'll keep this short because I don't want to derail. It took me months to paint up the minis (I'm slow like that), so there was no way to get a refund at that time. And after investing sweat equity in painting them I wasn't going to be willing to turn them in for a refund anyway. And it's possible that the employees didn't know about the mini line change. The timeframe? Wow, many years ago. The Epic Thunderhawks (with a huge pile of other minis) I bought were pretty plain, and I can't find an image of them online. This image of a Thunderhawk also seems to be more detailed than the model which replaced the ones I purchased. So it may have been 2 or more mini line changes ago.
    --
    Cheers,
    Kompera

  16. - Top - End - #106
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Person_Man's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The Reason for Imbalance in D20

    Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.

    I highly doubt any writer would think to themselves, "Hey, let's make Weapon Specialization is really weak. That will reward people for being smart and avoiding it." I assume they just didn't make balance a design goal. Instead, they wrote what they thought was interesting, and believed that players and DMs could handle PCs of varying power levels.

    I think that Monte was engaging in revisionist history, a point that he basically admitted. No one wrote Toughness to be weak. They wrote it to be situational, and didn't think it was important to explain that it was situational. So if you're a game designer, you should either include (somewhat correct) advice with your crunch, or you should create a chart of some sort that shows Typical Damage and Effects By Level and try to stick to it.

  17. - Top - End - #107
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Goblin

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Back in the USSR
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The Reason for Imbalance in D20

    Hey, wow, a thread with Rutee in it. And Illeterate_Scribe (who got his original account back and stopped using that one).

    Nice Necromancy, Person_Man. Especially of a thread that was just a massive flame war in the first place.

    EDIT: And Justin_Bacon. I didn't know he got banned...
    Last edited by Nerd-o-rama; 2008-12-08 at 08:30 PM.
    Spoiler
    Show

    Stealthy Snake avatar by Dawn
    Lack of images by Imageshack

  18. - Top - End - #108
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Piedmon_Sama's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    The Pacific Northwest
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The Reason for Imbalance in D20

    I'm so incredibly not at all sorry that I never DM'd a "standard" D&D campaign anymore, where before I always felt like somehow I wasn't a "real" DungeonMaster until I did at least one game according to RAW. Well, I know that's all bull**** now....

    Also: for once I'm glad my gamers are all lazy bastards who are barely familiar with the rules. Somehow this really cements it in my mind that the two different ways of gaming (which I'd break down as Rules Serve the Story vs Story Serves the Rules) really are incompatible.

  19. - Top - End - #109
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    RPGuru1331's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2008

    Default Re: The Reason for Imbalance in D20

    Quote Originally Posted by Piedmon_Sama View Post
    Also: for once I'm glad my gamers are all lazy bastards who are barely familiar with the rules. Somehow this really cements it in my mind that the two different ways of gaming (which I'd break down as Rules Serve the Story vs Story Serves the Rules) really are incompatible.
    From the mouth of Zombies comes ....brainz. But also something interesting. Since I imagine this thread will be locked as necromancy, can you please PM me on this?

    Also, cheese and crackers this must be old. Like, 4 banned people?
    Last edited by RPGuru1331; 2008-12-08 at 12:58 PM.
    Asok: Shouldn't we actually be working?
    And then Asok was thrown out of the car.

  20. - Top - End - #110
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Artanis's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    BFE
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The Reason for Imbalance in D20

    I count six banned people
    Quote Originally Posted by Cheesegear View Post
    Girlfriend and Parents: Why do you spend so much money on that stuff?
    Me: Would you rather I spent all my money on alcohol like others in my peer group?
    G&P: You keep spending as much money as you want!
    Spoiler
    Show
    Bossing Around Mad Cats for Fun and Profit: Let's Play MechCommander 2!

    Kicking this LP into overdrive: Let's Play StarCraft 2!

    Pistol Melee D.Va kills: Hanzo, Symmetra, Reinhardt, D.Va, McCree, Zenyatta, Reaper, S:76, Widowmaker, Genji, Mei, Junkrat, Bastion, Pharah, Tracer

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •