Gromnir

Yeah, pre-buffing is not an necessary and sufficient condition of pre-battle planning. Scouting, weapon & gear selection, positioning, party composition, and other I'm probably missing all fall under the pre-battle planning umbrella. So it's false to say by not adding pre-buffing PoE somehow doesn't have pre-battle planning. While it could be that pre-battle planning is diminished without pre-buffing, I don't think there are enough variety in the encounters found in the BB to really know. one could/should suggest that pre-battle planning is necessarily increased in the absence o' pre-buffing. if we keep insisting on using bg2 in spite o' the relative power disparity between bg2 and poe as envisioned by the obsidian developers, we will again note that while our pre-buffs differed somewhat depending on the enemies we were facing, those pre-buffs typically determined the difficulty o' a combat. our largely rote pre-battle ritual when utilized correctly, made all combats relative simple. aside from dragon battles, party positioning or coordination were relatively incidental concerns. did we have the proper weapons, potions and spells pre-cast and memorized? if the answer were yes, then we won. without pre-buffing, Gromnir must, perhaps counter-intuitive, be even concerned with luckman's aforementioned "strategic prepwork" and actual battle tactics. poorly positioned or timed spells and party coordination is of much greater importance if we do not have 5 or 6 layers of spell defenses that we know ahead o' time will be neutralizing our opponent abilities. tactics during battle is of far greater importance. similarly, strategic prepwork is more important as lack o' pre-bufss means synergy between party members abilities is of increased concern. when offering advice to pj earlier, we noted that with appropriate gear and pre-buffs, one could make korgan functional invulnerable by the mid-point o' the game. there is a relative limited number o' categories o' harmful enemy effects that one need protect against in the ie games-- mind effecting spells, and physical damage, and energy drain, etc. layer protections appropriately, and predict enemy ai, you gain functional immunity to harm. is a very useful way to approach bg2, nevertheless, the pre-buff-to-win approach strikes us as a bit shallow. again, there is a argument, a good argument, that removing pre-buffs is requiring far more tactical and strategic sophistication from the player, as well as avoiding a tedious and repetitive pre-battle ie ritual. HA! Good Fun!

Meshugger, question Would you say you are offended by some of the derogatory comments on Codex? And if you aren't can you tell me why ? But please think carefully about my question and your answer because I'll be asking you another question after that No, The whole concept of "offensive" for me, is if I should take person's opinion seriously or not. Sometimes the "foul" and "offensive" language is just plain ****posting that adds nothing of value, where i later find myself automatically scrolling past the the said persons posts. But at other times, a good point can be found beneath that edginess and vulgarity, which can bring new insight or will cause me to challenge my believes. I also truly believe that people are more honest in how they are expressing themselves if language is little to no controlled. As of emotional response to being offensive, there's is little to none. I get more angry at stupid people. Hitchens explains it better than me: quick note 'cause mesh clear misunderstands message o' the video he shared. http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/66172-female-gamers-having-a-hard-time-in-gaming-communites/?p=1448947 freedom o' speech is meaningless unless it protects speech that would otherwise offend. that being said, recognizing a right to be offensive (which doesn't genuine exist in most places outside the US, even those most liberal o' western democracies,) is not the same as asking for listeners to ignore or condone the message o' bigots. bigotry is harmful, in spite o' the views voiced by some in this thread. "If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence." to ignore the bigotry is to sully the freedoms we has been afforded. you has freedom o' speech not just so that you can say something offensive, but so that you might combat bigotry and intolerance with education and enlightenment. failure to act against the bigots is very much akin to walking past the mugging victim and pretending to ignore the "evil." ignoring bigotry is not the remedy envisioned. so yes, free speech is very much requiring a recognition that offensive speech is no less worthy o' protection than speech we like. as we has said elsewhere, offensive speech is the only kinda speech that is actual needing protection. even so, the belief that freedom o' speech necessarily means one should ignore intolerance and bigotry is wholly misguided and is a clear misunderstanding o' the titans referenced in the video mesh linked. we hope you actual watched it all as you do seem to have missed the central premise. oh, and we didn't play d:os or da:i as yet, so we cannot speak to the validity o' the rpgwatch list save to note that wasteland 2 appears to be ranked a bit high. then again, we didn't genuine play most o' the other titles nominated, so perhaps we is wrong on this point. HA! Good Fun!

dirty picture of our illegal drugs? were s'posed to be "or" and not "of." sheesh. dirty pictures of drugs? am not even gonna imagine. HA! Good Fun!

irrelevant aside: pnp protection from evil were actual far more useful than ie version as it protected against all kinda mind-affecting spells. however, the 10' protection from evil were just that, a stationary and immobile 10' freaking circle/sphere. HA! Good Fun!

Is this legit? privacy is based on some implied constitutional rights. there actual ain't anything in the constitution talking 'bout a right to privacy. nevertheless, the courts has found such a right by combining other rights and protections to create a penumbral right for citizens. given that such a right is based on a bit more shaky constitutional foundations, it is tending to get a narrow interpretation. such a right is personal. if we spend the night at a friend's house and we hide dirty pictures o' our illegal drugs (*chuckle*) in our friend's bathroom, we cannot raise a privacy claim if our drugs is discovered when the police make an unexpected and seemingly unwarranted search o' our friend's home. the police would not be able to use evidence o' our friend's illegal drugs, but Gromnir would be sol. we got a Personal privacy reach that is very limited. our self. our personal belongings and the clothes we is wearing. our car, but not where car is open to plain view, is affording us privacy rights, but not the car in which we is a passenger. we got privacy rights in our home, but if cops see stuff through open windows, we is not being private, is we. 'course using high-tech surveillance to "see" is not amusing to the courts-- naked human eye seeings only. businesses have much more reduced privacy than does people. However, you do has privacy for stuff such as safety deposit boxes. well, encrypted stuff on a 3p server is just like that, no? need a warrant for safety deposit box. simple, right? our encrypted digital stuff is just like that, no? no. Smith v. Maryland, (1979) said that a defendant has no fourth amendment rights in ‘‘information he voluntarily turns over to third parties." uh-oh. this is the law. is kinda going against common sense and modern realities, but it is law as of today. the Court has observed that they likely need to re-examine Smith v. Maryland given the realities o' the digital age, but they ain't actual done so. regardless, most info the fbi needed they got the old fashioned way. "ROSS WILLIAM ULBRICHT was arrested in San Francisco, California, on October 1, 2013. At the time of his arrest, ULBRICHT was using a laptop computer, which was seized in connection with his arrest and subsequently searched pursuant to a search warrant. ULBRICHT’s residence was also searched on October 1, 2013, pursuant to a search warrant, and federal law enforcement agents conducting that search found several pieces of computer hardware belonging to ULBRICHT (collectively, along with ULBRICHT’s laptop, the “computer hardware”). Through forensic analysis of the computer hardware, federal law enforcement agents recovered a Bitcoin wallet containing approximately 144,336 Bitcoins." HA! Good Fun!

aside: protection from evil aoe had a Long casting time and a very long duration at 2 turns per level o' the caster. it were an ideal pre-battle buff. HA! Good Fun!

Pre-buffing is still useful, and an alternative to casting in combat with an opportunity cost (sometimes it's better, sometimes it's worse - depends on the game, spell and encounter). It could have been better balanced absolutely, but just flat out removing it is simply listening to the ignorant portion of the fanbase only. the exact ooposite argument is just as valid. buffing only in combat is an alternative to prebuffing and it avoids the mindnumbing, slavish and ritualistic layering on of spells that many/most players engaged in before ie battles. can combat buffing be better balanced and more streamlined than we has seen so far in the beta? of course, one can only hope that it don't take the obsidian's developers to reach a fifth iteration (such as bg2 were o' the ie engine) before poe games offer similarly deep and complex combat, but it would be ignorant of those developers to pander to a small, and noisy portion of the fanbase that wants poe to replicate bad ie features as well as good. and am hoping it finally sinks in that one guy playing iwd without prebuffs is, and should be, no more meaningful to the obsidian developers than the feedback they has received via watching innumerable folks play the ie games. more importantly, the obsidian developers should be aware o' how poe testers has played poe and attempt to improve that game rather than making some kinda reactionary development choice 'cause a small number o' boardies bark louder and more frequent than do others. of more immediate note, we used aoe protection from evil frequently, and invariably when facing demons and devils. without metagaming, that would require us to cast such a spell when facing any high level mage or monster capable of high-level spell casting. so... frequently? yes, frequent. HA! Good Fun!

Yeah it does. The current topic of debate when you arrived was pre-buffing. My playthrough is relevant if you want to see how to win some encounters in Icewind Dale without pre-buffing (eg. Malavon). so what? this is insane. who cares if you could beat malavon with no prebuffing? why do you think that matters insofar as the possible implementation of pre-buffing in poe? you did it. we will happily consider it a fact that you were able to beat godzilla or malavon or whomever without any prebuffing... and we sure as hell don't need watch tedious video evidence o' such a thing (though we wonders what would possess somebody to bother recording such stuff.) so what? if poe were called sensuki's journey: part deux, and game were made for you to replicate your ie "fun," then we would understand your bizarre obsession with exposing your ie gameplay for the whole world to see, but so what? HA! Good Fun!

Incorrect, see my previous posts on the subject. Also incorrect. You don't have to apply more buffs to kill everything. You can use different weapons, different items, attack different targets first, interrupt enemy casters, switch aggro mid combat - all sorts of stuff not related to pre-buffing to win encounters. You can pre-buff too, but it's using a per day spell slot, and you can usually game around using them. Once again you missed the point (which seems to be a very common occurrence). There are people on this forum that think that Infinity Engine combat pretty much consists of cheesing the game to win, and are not even aware that there are so many things that you can do strategically or tactically to win encounters without cheesing, abusing rest, using exploits or anything like that. It doesn't matter that you don't care that I have a Let's Play - I have shown it to various people on the forum who previously didn't know that you could do some of that stuff and they have been educated by it. What's more, that particular post that you quoted the first time was not aimed at you, either. I did not post that I had a Let's Play in response to you. doesn't matter who it were directed at. the point stands that one guy being able to play a past ie game a certain way has got absolute zero relevance regarding the present issue. who cares? why should anybody care? wacky. HA! Good Fun!

So? In any RPG that lasts more than 10 hours, combat ITSELF is a time consuming ritual. But that doesn't mean it should be removed. The point is that Prebuffing is one element of many that comprises combat. Eliminating it is no different than eliminating any other part of combat. And in this day and age where every new RPG removes something that used to exist before, all in the name of 'streamlining', Here you come again, Gromnir, advocating the virtues of the DUMBED DOWN Modern mechanics that have ruined the entire genre. prebuffing is an element o' ie combat and you ain't established that it is a particularly compelling aspect. the dumb thing to do would be to add in a largely mindless and ritualistic feature for no other reason than that it existed in previous ie games. and again, prebuffing ain't being removed from anything. the question is whether or not such a thing is worth including in poe. the mere existence of prebuffing in ie games does not give it merit. freaking golden calf. HA! Good Fun!

No, but I have video evidence of it. I can actually back up what I am talking about dear lord. So Freaking What? why on earth would anybody care that you got video evidence? why would we care if you could beat iwd without pre-buffing? we know folks who played iwd and bg2 solo. so what? why would we care if you had video evidence if we already stated we don't care whether or not you could, would, or even you want to complete iwd w/o pre-buffing? this is getting bizarre. honest. the rest is repetitive. am not having much luck explaining thing to you o' late. HA! Good Fun!

Well technically we could say that we haven't heard a solid argument that justifies removing it either, if we were going to take the same way of approaching the discussion as you appear to be. I'm not super mad about the loss of pre-buffs (I did like them though), BUT their alternative is actually worse, and makes most of the spells that you would technically consider using as a pre-buff not worth casting in combat anyway. The game could be done without pre-buffs, but the way they have implemented it designed the spells/system is not very good and is certainly worse than IE spellcasting IMO. I believe you missed the entire point of my post, but I suppose after the Codex Top 10 thread, I wouldn't be surprised. no, we got you. he exploited a game mechanic. so what? is a fundamental flaw you and others got: a belief that there is a proper way to make or play crpgs. you disabuse yourself o' that notion and you will have a whole new world open up for you. regardless, we also addressed what you posted . regardless o' your claims about exploits, you said, "I have a full Let's Play of IWD that shows how I played that game, and you'll see that for most of the big fights I don't use a single prebuff. Sometimes I use maybe one." so what? you want some kinda prize? what do we get for our gnome party? you also said that the way somebody played the game couldn't have been much fun... which, especially given that we is talking about crpgs is just so freaking bass akwards we can't help but chuckle. this ain't anybody's problem but yours. HA! Good Fun!

pure subjective hokum. point out that his were clearly not the only way to do things and that a more varied approach were likely enjoyed by other people? sure. tell him that the way he played, "mustn't have been very fun" is as silly as were Gromnir's comment. di, a regular from long before you ever showed up on these boards, would s'posedley re-roll her characters until she got superhero scores. then she would breeze through combats like the Justice League fighting the molokai lepers. we didn't see how such an approach could be fun, but when she told us she liked the game better that we, we didn't even think to tell her that she didn't know what fun were or how to enjoy a game. what kinda arse would we be if we said such thing? we did argue that using a game editor would save her much time as 'posed to rolling, but she claimed that the act o' rolling her superheroes were fun. *shrug* dunno, but this kinda stuff should not be needing explanation or debate. HA! Good Fun!

it is not a matter of removing it. the question is whether to bother adding pre-buffing. the rules is new. there weren't no pre-buffing to remove. if pre-buffing didn't add genuine tactical value that outweighed it lugubriousness, then why add it? we played through iwd with an all gnome party. if you bothered to play the game any other way it must not have been much fun. ... wait. that is preposterous and just plain stoopid, isn't it? glad we caught that before making such a silly claim. HA! Good Fun!

then what is the argument? you say no pre-buffing were needed, so why care if such is removed? *shrug* pre-buffs were a largely time consuming ritual, and given that poe will be more akin to bg levels than bg2, the issue is even less worthy o' comparisons 'tween beatsies such as beholders and dragons. kobolds v. gnolls v. spiders? HA! Good Fun!

strategic prepwork? that would be more along the lines o' deciding how to approach the game as a whole, yes? in any event if the pre-battle prepwork is repeated over and over and over, then all you got is a time sink ritual. oh, we doubt that. most o' the spell layering will be the same. will you change some spells? sure, but a large number o' the pre-battle buffing is simple, mindless ritual. dragons and mindflayers and beholders and whatnot all posed different tactical challenges, but many o' the pre-buffs were absolutely identical. HA! Good Fun!

Prebuffs are just another gameplay mechanic. The problem is that like many things they were cut out completely instead of toned down and balanced. Even latest D&D has reduced their importance but didn't cut them out completely. calling something a mechanic doesn't make it good or bad. what about the prebuffs made them worth saving? perhaps some folks enjoy the ocd aspect o' prebuffs? before each major battle/encounter, one must go through largely the same exact ritual of prebuffs. does anybody believe that prebuffs is more tactically stimulating or engaging? that could be worth considering, but am not seeing how a ritual behavior performed dozens or hundreds o' times could evidence greater tactical sophistication than pretty much any alternative. am at a loss. HA! Good Fun! ps we forgot to mention the obvious, "because that is how it was done in bg2," non-argument, but was that necessary? the simple fact that something was done in the ie games does not mean it was a positive, right? that is obvious, correct?

I don't know about that. There can be situations where a game is so unusual that you 'misunderstand' how to approach it and you end up missing out on its brilliance until someone enlightens you. Planescape Torment is my example. It came out right after Bg1. The reason why I bought it is because 1) BG1 blew my mind, and 2) I really loved the Trailer....which was on the BG1 play disk. OK, so I bought the game and I proceeded to play it just like I played BG1. I rolled up a high Strength, high Constitution Warrior. Needless to say, my experience was complete Garbage. Because of my Low Wisdom and Intelligence, I got hardly any memories; ended up sacrificing Morte to the pillar of skulls because I didn't know better; had to fight my way past my other Incarnations in the fortress of regrets etc etc. It wasn't until I went online to Bash the friggin game as being a ridiculously Cheap "D&D experience" that people finally confronted me and taught me how the game is supposed to be played. So I went back, started a new game, Rolled up a high Wisdom, high Intelligence character, and then marveled at all the new things I was seeing and doing that weren't available to me before. am not certain we would call a low wisdom and low int play of ps:t to be garbage. our first run at ps:t were pretty much vanilla fighter, though we did test the other classes. weren't til late in the game that we started spending points in wisdom or intelligence. we enjoyed the game immensely. however, it were clear to us that some unpleasant developer were trying to have a joke at ps:t gamer expense. you couldn't play as a priest/cleric, and there were no magical defense adjustment in ps:t for high wisdom. so, for anybody who played bg, the first ie game, what possible reason would a rational player have for boosting wisdom above and beyond all other stats? for the xp bonus? sure, and that is why we put a few points into wisdom, but we sure as heck had no reason to think that wisdom would trump all other stats. we also didn't know at the start o' ps:t that combat would be so freaking terrible, so having a combat focused character were joke-on-us, right? the other end o' the ps:t spectrum is that once you play the game with high wisdom, intelligence and charisma, is there any freaking reason to play the game a different way? ps:t is our favorite crpg. even so, when some folks argue that torment is a steaming pile o' pretentious philosophy-for-dummies crap, served up with the worst ie combat and frequently tedious dialogues, we cannot argue 'gainst such folks with much force. ... 'course that is an argument in favor o' better balance, isn't it? HA! Good Fun!

in reference to the bold, yes, yes you did. you got a dopple you ain't sharing? You did it in this thread (no link needed) Mishandled development (which I replied to) No experience from combat Female gamers having a hard time in gaming communites you got no posts in the second two. you mention this thread: https://forums.obsidian.net/topic/66196-rpg-codexs-top-70-pc-rpgs/ but not only is there no posts from you, but Gromnir does not mention antisemitism or bigotry of codex in any way, shape or form. etc. 2 threads linked and one offensive image that resulted in a warning for you. we got no warnings. so, who got baited by whom? as we said, progress... codexian baby steps. HA! Good Fun!

iwd were much more straightforward as far as finding a single set of tactics that could get you though every battle. although the level design were often lacking in places like dragon's eye (too many s-shaped maps with repetitive encounters,) the enemy ai was excellent, particular compared to bg and totsc, the immediate predecessors o' iwd. even so, the same basic iwd approach could be used for fire giants as could be used umber hulks and even for mages... whatever your tactics/approach mighta been. bg2 were more complex than iwd if only because the spell catalog were so much deeper and monster were more varied. the variety in bg2 monsters tended to lead to immunity and functional immunity to any weapon an unprepared party might be carrying. a wizard could be immune to anything and everything if you didn't know how to bring down his protections. a demi-lich had a silly catalog o' spells and weapons it were immune to. bg2 adamantine golems were pushovers if you could get them trapped in a doorway and you had the dwarven thrower hammer, or one bow, or a truck load of melf's meteors, but if not...p00p. spellcasters, and monsters with advanced spellcasting ability, could prove immune to everything. sure, true sight coupled with a couple ruby rays of reversal will take any mage down a peg, but if you don't know that or aren't prepared for such battles, you is likely to lose party members, or even wipe. etc. also, in iwd, a very linear dragon-crawl, it were unsurprising that you typical had the weapons you needed for every battle. bg2 were not a game on rails. in bg2, you might very easily be outfitted complete wrong, and if you didn't have a very firm grasp o' your spell caster abilities and pnp knowledge o' the critters you faced, bg2 encounters could prove extreme challenging. even so, there were still some basic strategies that made the game relative easy even without perfect equipment or meta-knowledge. still, you might need to buy potions frequently til your spell repertoire increased, and you would also needs explore maps very slowly and carefully, which could be v...e..r..y..b..o..r..i..n..g. we had some experience with higher level d&d pnp, so bg2 were not too much o' a shock, but even for d&d pnp vets, how many folks played beyond 10th level? most o' our pnp experience, and such experience started with the white box edition, were 7th level and below. is only a tiny fraction o' pnp experience that were actual useful to us in bg2, so we can understands some bg2 frustration even for folks who were thinking themselves to be d&d knowledgeable. go slow. scout ahead. always keep some undead around. don't skimp on potions. buy the highest + weapon you can afford early in the game. and if you got korgan, which seems to be the case, make him a tank and give him some hammer proficiency. dwarven thrower hammer is available early and can hit many seeming uninhabitable critters. korgan with some potions and under influence o' berserk is potential immune to most affects. give him the amulet of power and the cloak of reflection and he almost litteral becomes unstoppable while berserk... and he can single-handed turn demi-liches into little piles o' sand. HA! Good Fun!

and yet, we see from the above linked threads, there is many times we has referenced the codex in threads without any mention o' antisemitism, and without actual even being critical o' rpgcodex. but again, 'cause it seems to be going over your head, or through it without stopping, the two times we has mentioned codexian antisemitism in threads where you were also posting, you could not restrain yourself from leaping to defend codexian honor and virtue (heh). which were, to fellow codexians we s'pose, very heroic and charming and silly and kinda proving our point rather than yours. you got a button that is easy to push... though we didn't manage to get you to post offensive nazi images this time, so perhaps you is growing as a person. http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/68888-mishandled-development/?p=1519774 you get a warning for that btw? as to your beliefs, well... HA! Good Fun!

am not sure if you realize how self-contradictory you is being at this point. earlier you seemed to think we couldn't resist codexian lure. now... well you got a new theory, but is kinda a mess. "You mention it in many threads without provocation it seems." why yes, it does seem that way, doesn't it? *chuckle* conversely, we see that in the two threads where Gromnir slanders codex with poison in our heart (HA!) and you is present in the thread, you end up following us down the rabbit hole. we can makes a link to more Gromnir posts though. you may accidental end up learning something through all o' this. HA! Good Fun!

"Haha this is fun. I was referring to your automatic commenting about the codex being antisemetic, racist, misogynist, homophobic (and so on and so forth) having nothing to do with 'lolbaiting' me." ​well that is narcissistic. why on earth would every reference by Gromnir o' codexian antisemitism be tied to you? heck, am not even knowing what your join date is on this board, but you were either so forgettable that we don't recall, or were relative recent... at least insofar as regular posting is concerned. am genuine not sure of your point. we has baited other codexians other than sensuki, yes. what works on you works equal well on them... as we said elsewhere in this thread, you do tend to suffer from groupthink. how very odd of you. ​how is that list coming, btw? HA! Good Fun! ps is wonderful that we (you) is getting more codexians to share in our shared wisdom. actual spending efforts digging through our old post? good on you. more 'bout Gromnir and less 'bout... well, anything else it seems. huzzah. pps why on earth would you link the following 2 threads: No experience from combat Female gamers having a hard time in gaming communites you don't have a single post in either? clearly you is confused. this thread and Mishandled development is two in which we both posted, and both is wonderful indicators o' how easily you get drawn in by any suggestion o' codexian flaw.

if you ain't in a thread participating, it would not seem to be within metaphorical earshot, yes? queerer and queerer... queerer doesn't sound like it should be a valid word, which is also queer. 85 rpgcodex posts and you note 5? actual examples: http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/45350-does-obsidian-intend-to-make-an-rpg-like-fo/?p=725755 yes, slanderous indeed. http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/46782-official-fallout-forums/?p=766166 no mention o' those things you seem to think inevitable follow Gromnir slander for which you must defend. http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/54229-dragon-age-discussion/page-9?hl=%2Brpgcodex+%2Bgromnir&do=findComment&comment=1014101 shucks. no disparagement o' codex despite somebody even linking to a codexian review. how does we hold ourself back? http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/54409-dragon-age-discussion/page-19?hl=%2Brpgcodex+%2Bgromnir&do=findComment&comment=1038688 hmmm. seems critical of soz review only. http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/55421-fighting-in-tunnels/page-2?hl=%2Brpgcodex+%2Bgromnir&do=findComment&comment=1043619 more horrible slander referencing the cesspit that is codex? maybe not, eh? http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/39742-obsidians-feargus-urquhart-at-rpg-codex-forum/page-3?hl=%2Brpgcodex+%2Bgromnir&do=findComment&comment=541259 another bad example for sensuki it seems. http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/66436-bittersweet-eternity-an-open-letter-addressed-to-obsidian-entertainment/page-6?hl=%2Brpgcodex+%2Bgromnir&do=findComment&comment=1464868 our codex reference here seems only to identify them as hardcore crpg fans. etc. given the 85 codex threads we see, many of which we don't involve ourself in any way, we seems to have only a tiny fraction wherein we reference the wonderful qualities o' antisemitism, misogyny, homophobia or any other similar such quality. so, wanna try again? btw, we still ain't speaking 'bout your linked list, is we? have another fish? HA! Good Fun!

not fooling anyone save you you mean? am running out of fish. ​still no discussion o' the list you posted? *chuckle* as we said, at this point we can be complete transparent and you will still continue with the farce. lord knows o' the dozens o' threads on these board with some mention o' codex (quick search says 85), we has participated in few, and in most such threads where we has participated, a rpgcodex reference by Gromnir is nowhere to be found. conversely, if we do happen to "slander" codex and you is anywhere in metaphorical earshot... well, is like flies to p00p. complete transparent and still the performance continues. HA! Good Fun!