Is arrogance a prerequisite for posting here? There certainly seems to be a lot of it flowing. I had originally checked my ego at the door, but I can play this game, too.
As for your most recent reply, I suggest you go back and carefully reread your previous responses to my questions and ideas. I think you will find them somewhat deflating. If you had been explaining yourself better previously, we would probably not be engaged in more wasted verbiage. Ultimately, I doubt anything you say will be terribly convincing until you stop contradicting yourself and work a little harder to logically support your thinking. Your earlier overgeneralizations with regard to game mechanics left you in a position from which all you can say is "incorrect" or "my actual reason was..." Perhaps I am supposed to suddenly stop thinking and accept your views because you have become more and more bombastic? Right now I find myself asking, "Who is Peter Metcalfe to point anything out to me?" I can only assume that you've made some rather poor assumptions if you feel that "pointing" anything out to me is your role.
I signed on to this board to discuss, not bicker. I was having a little problem working out how dual wield skill might affect edges and other aspects of combat, so I asked questions and made proposals. Granted, my first ideas came straight off the top of my head and were not terribly sound. However, I was still looking for cognizant responses based upon possibilities rather than just individual preferences. Sadly, you chose to force-feed me the latter. I would suggest that if you really want to convince anyone that you know what you are talking about, you should provide some evidence. Stating repeatedly that something is fact does not make it so; try responding with more than empty sentences. Maybe you could even throw a little numerical evidence in.
Maybe the questions I have been asking are all a rehash of ideas you've seen before and this has somehow annoyed you. If this is the case, I guess I should be posting on a board that welcomes people who are relatively new to the game system. Or maybe you really do not understand the subtleties of our language and simply make your way through written discourse like a bull in a china shop. I'm not really sure what the reasoning is, but your tone with me has been pretty condescending, and your attitude toward anyone who disagrees with you seems fairly aggressive. (I do remember stating that we seem to simply disagree on the matter and would gladly have left it at that...)
I am not going to waste any more time on this issue. I have already decided that, as someone else wisely suggested, the bonuses and penalties for dual wield should be taken on a case-by-case basis, with the player's description reflecting the majority of the modification. Furthermore, I intend to make it possible for the dual wielding character to gain feats specific to his unusual skill via heroquests.
Hopefully, this puts the whole argument to rest, and all of us can move on to other topics and ideas. I, for one, certainly do not plan to discuss any of this nonsense further.
Thanks,
John
Powered by hypermail