Gromnir

am gonna add one thing by noting how exclusion ain't so much protection o' innocence or future innocence. rules 'which set guilty free when govt violates rules ain't so much 'bout protecting the innocent as is 'bout protecting rights of everybody, innocent or guilty. is the kinda thing which should make gd happy 'cause makes rights more important than justice or even people. we go to great the lengths in this country to protect intangible ideals from government interference, even to the point we is protecting wrongdoers, evildoers, from the State. HA! Good Fun!

negative: a pence presidency would make daily wh news conferences boring 'cause executive activities would be predictable. positive: nuclear holocaust during a pence presidency seems far less likely. tough choices. HA! Good Fun!

Ehh Gromnir. Am glad that you feel relieved. And at same time am saddened. Your reply style more and more resembles that of Litter-Bearer fan type (that is described in the bottom part of this article).There is really no need to be that highbrow and condescending. That said, I'll see myself out, as am no longer interested in the subject of this thread, nor in continuing such discussion. well, if you is gonna resort to convenient categorization/marginalization based on tv tropes website, then am believing a bit o' condescension is warranted. heck, the category you indicate don't mesh well with the fact we observed how fan idiocy were only a collective issue rather than individual. in any event, as somebody who has been posting for decades here and elsewhere, our criticisms is widespread. we sure as heck haven't held our self up as some kinda one true measure o' game goodness. our opinions is no more relevant than yours-- never even implied otherwise. but take your opinion and Gromnir's and a handful o' others and somehow pretend as if an imagined consensus from the few dozen beta regulars is meaningful is the worst kinda arrogance. max feels victimized? *chuckle* so too has any number o' others and groups AND developers. our most harsh game related criticism has, in point o' fact, been directed at developers, as folks such as josh and david gaider and others could attest even if such a reality don't mesh with max's hasty marginalization efforts. that said, we will concede how even w/o reply/quote silliness, you have managed to draw us off-topic and make your response little more than a complaint 'bout Gromnir. clear weren't reply/quote which were problematic. HA! Good Fun!

agreed... but is difficult for many to accept the injustices which results. “for the law holds, that it is better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer.” HA! Good Fun!

the bundy folks is bad guys. doesn't matter though. US system is a bit weird. most o' the rest o' the civilized world do not let bad guys go free 'cause the government made a mistake or acted unlawful. govt. malfeasance is not a "get out of jail free" card virtual anywheres but the US. may not be logical, but there is wisdom in the US system, even if we personal do not like it. to discourage future malfeasance by the govt., bad guys is allowed to walk free when government is a wrongdoer. doesn't matter if the defendant is a bad guy as govt bad actions trump. bundys is bad, but it don't matter in this case. government can't get away with doing wrong 'cause it is later shown the victim o' the govt wrongdoing were also a bad guy. the State is held to a higher standard. there is any number o' practical disadvantages to being a defendant in a criminal proceeding. however, there is many systematic advantages to being the defendant. with competent counsel (if the defendant is able to afford such) there is much challenge to getting a conviction o' even the obvious/clear guilty in the US system... which like it or not, is part o' the design. should never be surprised when bad cops or bundys or evil drug dealers go free. the system is consciously rigged to favor such folks. HA! Good Fun!

yes. "if developers is convinced by a good argument from the boardies, then numbers shouldn't matter. if is good for the game, then do it. and sure, sometimes player ineffable feels and emotions is actual as important as is cold, hard facts or well crafted logic. can't dismiss the gut impressions o' the mob before or after release. even so, am thinking the obsidians realized, too late, that trying to make everybody satisfied tends to be resulting in nobody being complete happy." am suggesting the developers need step back from reactivity. don't go all absurdism on us and pretend as if such an appeal means developers should complete ignore any and all advice. HA! Good Fun!

*sigh* already explained. listen to fans is good, but listen too much to idiotic fans can hurt the game. we gave numerous examples o' questionable choices not made 'cause developers genuine believed such changes helped the game, but 'cause developers were caving to fan demands. vancian casting were never 'posed to be in poe, but a small group were extreme vocal, so obsidian changed. numerous post release builds o' poe saw the developers attempting to walk balk that decision before vancian were finally exorcised in deadfire. insofar as vancian casting, how many builds and years did it take the obsidians to final get back to where they started 'fore they mistaken listened to a small number o' overrepresented fans? ain't the fan's fault. as you note, developers is asking for fan feedback. the problem for developers is board fans not only represent only the smallest portion o' total game fans, but trying to glean useful notions 'bout fan consensus from a homogenized group which is nevertheless myopic, irrational, unreasonable, self contradictory and frequent idiotic is o' questionable merit. even when fans do appear to reach consensus, one must be dubious 'bout arriving at conclusions based 'pon such consensus as fans do not appear to realize what it is they has requested. so what is the fluffy drivel 'bout? again, developer reactivity feels like a good thing. however, often such reactivity is the very thing which hurts the game and ultimate angers fans. developers need be careful 'bout too much reactivity. HA! Good Fun!

in our experience, most people believe as do boeroer. unfortunate, history teaches us how most people is wrong. particular for entertainment, give folks what they claim to want is doomed. at best, match expectations results in a product which is derivative and uninspired and dull. is particular difficult for crpg developers who got a product which is gonna require tens o' hours o' time investment by the player. hard to be fresh for +20 hours. is a few comic examples o' fans not knowing what they want... the single most common demand from boardies during bg2 development, other than bug reduction, were an appeal for less 'o the bg1-style wilderness maps. fans wanted more durlag's tower and less one-map-south-of-beregost nonsense. not kidding. were not even a close call for most common appeal. durlag's tower portion o' totsc were representing the sea change 'bout which the bg2 fans were clamoring. unfortunate, bg2 is released and sudden we see loads 'folks complaining 'bout the dearth o' exploration. heck, we were genuine shocked by how many folks complaining 'bout bg2 lack o' exploration were also the same folks demanding less bg1 wilderness map mowing. so even if developers thinks they got some kinda clear consensus from fandom, there is a good chance the fans simple got no idea what the heck they want. *chuckle* immediate following the initial deadfire beta release, we saw many demands for a return o' the universal talents. how could the developers believe reducing customization options which were available in poe would be a good idea for deadfire? 'course the developers explained how over the past few years one o' the most common complaints regarding the poe classes were lack o' differentiation-- players were tending to take same/similar universal talents regardless o' class. deadfire beta created more differentiated classes. turns out class differentiation ain't what folks actual wanted even if they were demanding. yeah, sometimes the problem is folks who know what they want do not realize how what they want is self-contradictory. 'course other times the difficulty facing developers is simple the reality o' the inevitable fail o' matching expectations. folks can't ask for what they do not know. can't like something you ain't experienced. unfortunately, if obsidian cobbles together a frankenstein o' stuff bob or mary enjoyed and wants from a host o' other games or entertainment sources, the results is gonna be so much regurgitated pap. perhaps obsidian gives bob and mary poe 4.0 with elements o' fallout and witcher iii and whatever is the crpg flavor o' the week at the moment. great? no. derivative. tired. dull. listen to fans, but don't trust they know what they want, 'cause chances are they do not. HA! Good Fun!

so, it appears you did want to get "into it." as we noted 'bove, were clear not simple a matter of mislabeling as you did selective choose... and the google search were precise the problem for you, which would explain why you didn't link. most such google search definitions for generic do not include denotative derogatory. google search is part o' your problem, not your rescue. you used a mislabeled and, in hindsight, anomalous dictionary definition to refute ninjamestar. try and reverse so is Gromnir error is amusing. Upon searching for "generic definition" on Google, the result I get *does* list the derogatory form as a definition for it. Likewise it is seen in the Oxford dictionaries site: https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/generic I didn't feel further clarification was needed, but fair enough, since you're so bent on making a fuss out of it. ofcourse the definition you selective listed is at the oxforddictionaries site. we linked the oxford site earlier to point out how your efforts, intentional or otherwise, were misleading. https://forums.obsidian.net/topic/95496-inherent-flaws-in-soulbound-items/?p=1968447 "I've always known it as a derogatory term when used in a derogatory fashion, and it is recognized as such by all dictionaries I'm looking at. " again, no. you cherry picked. oxford is actual the outlier from the dictionaries you were likely looking at. https://forums.obsidian.net/topic/95496-inherent-flaws-in-soulbound-items/?p=1968620 is becoming spam with Gromnir need having relink previous posts from mere a page past. in any event, took you two days to correct your original misleading post, but am guessing you deserve some kinda credit for doing so. am suspecting you will need continue this... one wonders how long you can maintain the charade. HA! Good Fun!

so, it appears you did want to get "into it." as we noted 'bove, were clear not simple a matter of mislabeling as you did selective choose... and the google search were precise the problem for you, which would explain why you didn't link. most such google search definitions for generic do not include denotative derogatory. google search is part o' your problem, not your rescue. you used a mislabeled and, in hindsight, anomalous dictionary definition to refute ninjamestar. try and reverse so is Gromnir error is amusing. am only continuing 'cause you cannot seem to let it go. am not certain why we always need be the grownup in these situations. HA! Good Fun!

more awkwardness. example: we reply 'bout holy meditation casting time... observe how the problem ain't pregnant cast times but rather disproportionate short durations for a few such spells. is nothing inherent unbalanced with a level 1 single-person buff taking long to cast. only becomes an issue if melee folks is attacking multiple times for big damage during such a casting time, particular when the duration o' the buff lasts little longer than the cast+recovery. why cast the spell priest is gonna contribute much more by simple using his/her own melee weapons during the cast time? the payoff from the spell is only gonna come close to evening out if it has a long duration. 'course such a disagreement and discussion takes us further afield o' the point o' the thread... and much further than the direction o' Gromnir's posts which you is now s'posed responding to. however, we will observe how such illustrated disagreement does serve to undercut the consensus notions you embraced earlier regarding casting times. even so, am relieved you found clarification regarding our point regarding idiocy o' fan collective. baby steps it seems. HA! Good Fun!

adjective adjective: generic 1. "..." 1.1 "..." 1.2 derogatory lacking imagination or individuality; predictable and unoriginal. naughty boy let google light the way... at least this once. https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/generic sure, generic can be derogatory, but am suspecting we weren't only person to be surprised to see "1." for such a definition. HA! Good Fun! That was due to trying to cut and highlight what I wanted to. Quoting in this forum is... Weird. At least for me. It took a few tries to get it to look close to right. It's not that I was putting it as the primary definition, simply as *a* definition, which is the one used above. 10 second fix. and yeah, by labelling as "1" (unnecessarily we might add if you were simple posting a definition rather than the definition) you were being misleading, particular as you didn't bother to include the link, as did Gromnir. maybe a mistake. maybe not. HA! Good Fun! If you want to twist a minor detail into a deliberate attempt to mislead or misinform the rest, suit yourself. I'm not getting into this again. "The lady protests too much, methinks."-- hamlet, act 3, scene 2. dunno, this quote thing don't seem so difficult to us, but if you wanna actual protest, then we will continue. welcome. in addition to the clear mislabeling o' the definition, you chose the one readily available online dictionary definition which actual included a derogatory aspect for generic. https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1CHFX_enUS699US699&ei=-E9SWt38J8eV0gKD8ILgDg&q=generic+definition&oq=generic+d&gs_l=psy-ab.1.0.0l7j0i10k1j0l2.13117.14178.0.16155.4.3.1.0.0.0.187.540.0j3.3.0....0...1.1.64.psy-ab..0.4.542...0i67k1j0i20i264k1.0.czqc4hYKPmY dictionary.com merriam-webster cambridge etc. so, you cherry pick a dictionary definition which provides a derogatory aspect for generic denotative as 'posed to mere connotative, and then you mislabel and fail to provide linky. to a reasonable onlooker it would appear as if you tailored your response for effect... and you got caught. no biggie... but don't do it again. john 8:11. quack. HA! Good Fun!

adjective adjective: generic 1. "..." 1.1 "..." 1.2 derogatory lacking imagination or individuality; predictable and unoriginal. naughty boy let google light the way... at least this once. https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/generic sure, generic can be derogatory, but am suspecting we weren't only person to be surprised to see "1." for such a definition. HA! Good Fun! That was due to trying to cut and highlight what I wanted to. Quoting in this forum is... Weird. At least for me. It took a few tries to get it to look close to right. It's not that I was putting it as the primary definition, simply as *a* definition, which is the one used above. 10 second fix. and yeah, by labelling as "1" (unnecessarily we might add if you were simple posting a definition rather than the definition) you were being misleading, particular as you didn't bother to include the link, as did Gromnir. maybe a mistake. maybe not. HA! Good Fun!

That's logically true. Fans can be idiots. Uhm, sorry for nitpicking, but you said "can be idiots" (which is true), and not "we are idiots" (which may not be true).Also (in this context) it would probaly make sense to use "shortsighted" instead; because besides having low intelligence, it's also possible to arrive to wrong conclusion by not having enough/correct input data. That said I salute your call for improved transparency. Unless you meant unanimous consensus, don't you exagerate a bit?- topics with high consensus: casting speed, impact of melee vs ranged, beta 1 injuries being too severe - topics with average consensus: general talents, penetration system (some players still favor the flat and/or gradual approach; but still the majority as finding the iteration of AR vs PEN as being too abrupt) - topics with low consensus: MIG/RES vs STR/RES I'd just add that it's great when fans' input and wishes are constructive, concrete and taking an advice or pov, instead of the occasional enforcing form. reply/quote to small portions? is how these debates devolve as folks lose track of larger issues and then quibble over tangential details. we will note how we do believe it is fair to refer to fans, as a whole, as idiotic. am not speaking of individual posters, but of fans, collective. from pov o' the developer, the fans is self-contradictory, irrational, unreasonable AND myopic. as a group, those qualities, presented consistent, would be justifiable described as idiotic. will also disagree 'bout your perceived and arbitrary levels o' consensus. casting times is, for example, far less a consensus issue than you may believe. take a look at summoned weapon threads for example. like it or not, is including a cast time aspect and is not consensus. also, a few folks such as Gromnir who suggested the real problem for casters were the penetration mechanic and overpowered synergies available to many melee builds making casters appear weak by comparison, has begun to suffer fatigue and reduce posting. developers already heard us, so is no reason to beat the horse to death as those demanding shorter casting times has done. regardless, we stand by opinion the developers should be careful o' listening to fan feedback. at some point, listen to fan must end for a good game to result. HA! Good Fun!

adjective adjective: generic derogatory lacking imagination or individuality; predictable and unoriginal. "generic dance-floor fillers" naughty boy let google light the way... at least this once. https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/generic sure, generic can be derogatory, but am suspecting we weren't only person to be surprised to see "1." for such a definition. HA! Good Fun!

we mentioned how eastern europeans is general more friendly and less anti-american. have mentioned previous on these boards what a warm welcome we got in poland. gdansk is one o' our favorite places... anywhere. 3rd largest city in poland means it is relative small by our standards and while krakow and warsaw has become more cosmopolitan in recent years, gdansk stayed the smallish burgh we recalled. just a beautiful and friendly northern european town on the ocean with underappreciated food and entertainment opportunities. quaint is not a criticism. our observation 'bout growing racial intolerance were as follows: "also gonna observe how as a dark-skinned man, recent years has seen us receiving increasing chilly reception from locals in much o' europe. for all the talk o' american racism, europeans as a whole is having a hard time with their recent refugee crisis and as an obvious minority o' enigmatic origin, we draw more than a little additional attention than we is accustomed to. not many lakota on the streets o' berlin, eh?" the race problem were separate from our observations 'bout foreigners general friendliness and their dealings with americans. the race issue is widespread and includes scandinavia based on our more recent short trips to sweden and denmark. however, am gonna concede we ain't been back to eastern europe recent, but based on news and other more personal sources, we would expect a different initial reception than the one we enjoyed previous... at least 'til it became obvious we were American and not north-african/middle eastern/whatever. we got dark skin and straightish black hair, so in the US we is often mistaken for mexican or puerto rican or middle eastern, depending on whatever bigotry the observer suffers. HA! Good Fun! ps am thinking we mentioned once how am pretty certain we caused a car accident in russia as a passing motorist gawked at us in surprise.

Not the first time that animals have been shown to use stuff to get high or something, catnip for example. nobody suggested it were a first "humans aren’t the only creatures that suffer from substance abuse problems. Horses eat hallucinogenic weeds, elephants get drunk on overripe fruit and big horn sheep love narcotic lichen. Monkeys’ attraction to sugar-rich and ethanol-containing fruit, in fact, may explain our own attraction to alcohol, some researchers think." *shrug* HA! Good Fun!

the thing is, most foreigners find Americans to be friendly and welcoming... if stoopid, lazy, bigoted, etc. so regardless o' the preconceptions Americans got o' others, even the folks who appear to hate us thinks we are cheerful if dimwitted lot. HA! Good Fun!

Dolphins Seem to Use Toxic Pufferfish to Get High one can almost predict which obsidian forumites will be most intrigued by the linked article. HA! Good Fun!

visiting europe would be nice... if not for all the europeans. in our experience, the linked vid is kinda typical o' most western europeans. sub-saharan africa and much of eastern europe (not all) is suffering less ack jassery than western europeans when dealing with Americans. am admitted having little experience with south americans in their native countries, so got little input save for to note how we genuine need make a south american trip eventual. asians is weird split. vietnamese and chinese were great on our visits-- warm welcomes. south koreans and japanese were... polite, but... also gonna observe how as a dark-skinned man, recent years has seen us receiving increasing chilly reception from locals in much o' europe. for all the talk o' american racism, europeans as a whole is having a hard time with their recent refugee crisis and as an obvious minority o' enigmatic origin, we draw more than a little additional attention than we is accustomed to. not many lakota on the streets o' berlin, eh? HA! Good Fun!

old complaint from Gromnir, but is our opinion the obsidians were too reactive to fan input during poe development. https://forums.obsidian.net/topic/91392-the-loss-of-vancian-casting/?p=1880072 https://forums.obsidian.net/topic/71242-interview-with-josh-sawyer-tomorrow-thursday-the-19th-at-8-pm-est-on-my-twitch-channel/?p=1589870 repost from march 21, 2015: one of the greatest strengths of poe will also be one of its greatest weakness. josh did mention in the interview just how much impact the input the community had on the game, which should be reassuring. to know that there is a possibility that features will be changed based on some kinda community consensus, which is 'bout as rare as a unicorn in central park, results in more folks becoming invested in the game, and not just monetarily. fans already see poe as their game, which is a good thing. more than a few things has been changed in poe as a result o' fan requests, and so fans see that they has made a difference. unfortunately, reactivity is a double-edged sword. fans can be idiots. the fact that we can be idiots in large numbers is cause for concern rather than applause. josh, in the interview, made comment about dealing with the feeling requests. sadly, more than a few o' the feeling changes arguably make the game worse rather than better. a fighter that is exceptional at simultaneous exacting and absorbing damage were a given in the ie games, so that is what the fans o' poe expected and clamored to get included into poe even though the poe fighter had a more limited role in poe. similarly, the paladin, were meant as a support character that were excellent in defense. the paladin's role were important to the developers 'cause it helped differentiate the numerous classes they created. got multiple support characters that is all good offensive and defensive and is great with melee weapons? what is point o' making multiple classes f they is all capable o' fulfilling the same role? even so, the fans wanted a poe paladin who could smite the wicked rather than one who were mere able to hold up a shield and defend against such villains and monsters. well, in response to public demand, we received a smite ability. is not that smite is bad, but it don't improve the paladin more than giving folks more o' the paladin feel they expected. wasted resources? perhaps. from the interview we could see that josh saw value in the way 4e differentiated the roles o' classes. rogues and wizards in 4e played very different, they had different roles and each class could excel in that role. unfortunately, 4e rogues didn't feel enough like 3e or ad&d rogues, and 4e wizards didn't feel enough like mordenkainen or tenser to d&d fans. the obsidians ran into the same problem with the poe community. expectations got/get in the way o' obsidian making progress, and their obstacle is the feelings o' the community. is nothing wrong with fulfilling wishes based on nothing save feel, as long as such stuff doesn't measurably impact developer notions o' balance and their ever-shrinking pool o' man-hours. add token bestiary, exploration and traps/lock xp? were easy to add, and so we got such token features included in poe. why? feel. were not a tough fix and it appeased those who wanted some kinda throwback to ie game xp awards. token xp grants didn't fundamentally alter the quest & objective xp mechanic obsidian adopted and were a cheap fix. win-win, eh? Gromir paid money to obsidian to make poe 'cause we trust that they can make a good pc crpg. at some point we gotta step back and let the folks that know what they are doing, do their work. why hire somebody if you aren't gonna trust 'em to do the actual work they were hired to do? Gromnir wants input, but if developers offer a rational and reasonable reason as to why they chose to do A instead o' B, we typical trust 'em. yeah, we want explanations and, from time to time, we will rail and moan like a little kid if we disagree, but for the most part, what we is looking for is transparency more than control. am thinking poe will be a stronger 'cause o' its transparency. at the same time, we believe that the game were somewhat diminished by the obsidian decision to actual listen to us, 'cause as we said already, we are idiots. end repost terrible thing is, the obsidians attempted to fix some o' their poe mistakes and a great deal o' the pushback from fans you see regarding the deadfire beta is simple reactionary. the fans o' poe want deadfire to play more like poe, even if the stuff they want "fixed" is the broken stuff from poe the developers is trying improve. poor balanced classes which is able to excel at everything in part 'cause of obvious dump stats and universal available no-brainer talents is what the loudest fans want. so we is back to where we were in mid/late 2014 with a small but vocal group o' fans hijacking the dialogue concerning improvement o' poe/deadfire. sure, is no longer ie/d&d grognards making the most noise. instead it is the hardcore poe fans who resist mechanic and balance changes proposed by obsidian and instead want deadfire to be little more than poe + multiclassing. the developers spent years developing poe... they spent years coming up with ideas 'bout how to improve poe. unfortunately, the diehard fans get their hands on the beta for even a few days and many were already in full bedwetting mode. many were complaining 'bout how terrible gimped were ciphers and casters or whatnot 'cause o' changes made regardless o' the actual performance o' such classes in the beta. "but in poe my cipher could..." ... oh, and balance competing fan wants is dooming deadfire to mediocrity. look at fan feedback and recognize how divisive is the opinions regarding everything. even for a relative homogenized group such as the beta testers, there is little consensus 'bout... anything. make game so is acceptable to most number o' people is the same theory behind tract housing and fast food. try and make everybody happy and result is gonna be pleasantly inoffensive. might be good business for obsidian to shoot for broad appeal, but give folks what they, as a group, actual ask for is dooming the results to mediocrity. listen to fans is good. fan feels is important. nevertheless, there needs be a point at which the developers show confidence in their own abilities regardless o' the protests o' a few mouthy malcontents. the obsidian developers got Years of feedback and hard tangible data 'pon which to draw conclusions. has gotta be an end to it. obsidian should make what they believe to be the best possible deadfire even if the best deadfire is a fail for some number o' folks, 'cause it will be a fail for some no matter how many people they try and please. do something meaningful. "nobody hated it." developers gotta realize such an observation is a scathing critique and not a compliment. HA! Good Fun!

plugging the hometown is likely the most useful advice we can provide. Gromnir has been a tourist in hundreds and even thousands o' places, and while we lived in europe for a couple years, we never stayed in one place long enough to genuine know it. however, is a handful o' places 'bout which we can give shady the genuine insider info and only a few such places is vacation spots. cali has a number o' vacation worthy destinations and is a goodly number o' posters hereabouts who is residing in in the loopy state, and each o' us is gonna likely know something unique shady would never glean from internet searches or travel guides. heck, we can personal provide breakfast/lunch/dinner restaurant recommendations for bay area, monterey, carmel, paso robles/slo, santa barbara and la. as an aside, is worth going to la if only to get tacos and a t-shirt from a guerrilla tacos truck. HA! Good Fun!

we like new orleans music and food, but am personal disliking the deep south to such a degree that future trips to new orleans is only ever gonna be a work/business destination for us. the casual/reflexive/subtle racism o' much o' the deep south is almost as oppressive to us as is the humidity. the thing 'bout food though is it is easy to find good food in all the expected places. heck, hurl might as well mention the bay area, no? san francisco, palo alto and napa is all geographic proximate... with napa being a bit o' a drive. can spend literal weeks doing nothing but eating at fantastic restaurants in the bay area and napa. go to the french laundry for dinner and you should be demanding great food, not simple expecting. *shrug* spend less than $10 to get an enormous serving o' the world's best perogies from a little place in gdansk? one o' the three best italian restaurants we ever ate at boasted cracked red vinyl booths and honest-to-god christmas lights adorning the walls year 'round at a nondescript suburban chicago location. have spent rent money for a steak in tokyo which weren't near as good as the ribeyes from a little place in rapid city, south dakota, a place we sacrilegious refer to as heaven. for us, most o' the fun o' eating on vacation is finding the unexpected places which don't cost us the equivalent o' a night's stay at a 4-star hotel. regardless, whenever we go on vacations o' a week or more, we always get a room with a functional kitchen, 'cause chances are we is gonna be making most o' our own meals. HA! Good Fun! ps am suspecting any ca suggestions will be dismissed, but a highway 1 vacation is worth doing at least once in a lifetime. multitude o' great food options, a variety o' unique natural grandeur locales and seeming endless stretches o' water... though admitted teeth-chattering cold water in most places. yeah, the pch doesn't reach san diego, but is a great destination... and not just for the fish tacos.

gravy? am afraid shady is gonna be stuck with a montreal 2018 vacation. am not a fan o' montreal, but if it is gravy you want... HA! Good Fun! ps other thing for which montreal is deserved noteworthy is nudy bars and sex trade... so there is that.

and as Gromnir pointed out some time ago, if you wanna analogize to self buff, then you should accept reduced durations. casting time and durations is all part how such spells is balanced. the summoned weapons, with durations equivalent to other self buffs, will sudden become far less useful in the more challenging encounters of the game. HA! Good Fun! No. Because the universal self buff would give you +15 ACC for everything - while the +15 on the weapon is only useful if you attack with said weapon. But if shorter durations are required to make the summoneing process faster then so be it. Somebody who wants to focus on summoned weapons can call forth one and the same weapon twice per encounter - or just use a summoned weapon from another spell level. I'd rather have a fast cast with a shorter duration than a long cast with a long duration. you do realize distinguishing universal is simple another quality which is making the analogy less​ useful, yes? you made an observation 'bout self buffs being quick casts and analogized summoned weapons to self buffs. self buffs often have limited durations, regardless o' the effects. the more you help us distinguish summons and self buffs, the more you relegate durations and cast times to being nothing more than ordinary aspect o' balancing rather than some kinda inherent quality o' a class o' spells. HA! Good Fun!