Now you've gone and done it... I'm gunna have to have Sehraci sew my sides back up...grimjim wrote:Admitting you have a problem is the first step. I'm very proud of you.
---
*Shares the Pie with Sxar*
Now you've gone and done it... I'm gunna have to have Sehraci sew my sides back up...grimjim wrote:Admitting you have a problem is the first step. I'm very proud of you.
So much so we can imagine an inclusive game!riveit wrote:Come up with a good rp reason. You and Grimjim can be so imaginative!
Not before you visit the Wizard tinman.ajsuk wrote:Now you've gone and done it... I'm gunna have to have Sehraci sew my sides back up...
[OOC]Jim, one would say that someone not following the wishes of their faction and fighting for different sides are hardly moderates. Hypocrites or maybe even heretics would be closer definititions according the any theasaurus.grimjim wrote: The 2D fanatical representations that Raynes or Doubletap portray are very simplistic but even those who make factional choices needn't be the same sort of cardboard cut outs as those, as we see in some OP battles where Kami or Karavan moderates end up fighting for different sides.
The comparison is more akin to that between the types of religious who picket abortion clinics, spout hate at homosexuals or blow themselves up as compared to those who quietly believe and speak out against such behaviour.vguerin wrote:[OOC]Jim, one would say that someone not following the wishes of their faction and fighting for different sides are hardly moderates. Hypocrites or maybe even heretics would be closer definititions according the any theasaurus.
Do we call the folks that go to church to find a mate moderates ? We have all seen them, following a religion for other purposes than devotion to the "higher power" is not moderation. I like to play my game style as do you, but the terms we use to describe the same thing can have our own slant without changing definitions. I cannot agree with what you call moderate.
The poll results speak for themself...[/OOC]
Quite possibly it is something that was always intended to be this way, but not implemented due to time constraints. Why would it be that unrealistic to believe that it was intended the way it is now.grimjim wrote:One thing I wish would come out of this would be people understanding (or remembering) that these TPs were taken away and were accessible before and since then neutrals ain't been thrown a bone - yet.
'xactly!marct wrote:Quite possibly it is something that was always intended to be this way, but not implemented due to time constraints. Why would it be that unrealistic to believe that it was intended the way it is now.
Yes it was "taken away."
And lastly, why do you EXPECT the neutrals to be thrown a bone?
Exactly. The whole "that's not the way it's supposed to be" attitude comes from seeing the game in a certain state before episode two. When the reality is that state was the result of not having the resources and having many things left unfinished.marct wrote:Quite possibly it is something that was always intended to be this way, but not implemented due to time constraints. Why would it be that unrealistic to believe that it was intended the way it is now.
Yes it was "taken away."
And lastly, why do you EXPECT the neutrals to be thrown a bone?