User talk:Hooper/Banned Material
From D&D Wiki
Note to self: March 19th, 2010. 12:31am
Hooper, great list. Catch you later. --Jay Freedman 16:55, 18 September 2009 (MDT)
- No Jay. You see, the players in my campaign know I am on here, and visit it frequently. They routinely find things online and bring it for games (and I do it in their games) if the DM approves. As such, the link is to assist them in knowing that if they come across that - it is expressly forbidden. This is all a matter of our gaming circle and doesn't apply. I will not remove the word horrendous, as it is a personal user subpage and a personal opinion held by all of our gaming circle. Thanks for asking though. I honestly don't see what the big deal is (other than hitting a nerve with people afraid that I'm right...). Many users have personal subpages, even Ghostwheel, that have banned material or house rules. Thats all this is. The fact that a banned user brought attention to is by utilizing flawed thought processing with a badly written essay more reminiscent of an hour of Rush Limbaugh than true Gygax-induced tabletop gaming is the only reason anyone else even noticed.
- Besides, the response given is flawed within the first sentence. Let me show you:
|“|| Challenge Ratings for NPCs:
An NPC with a PC class has a Challenge Rating equal to the NPC’s level.
|—Dungeon Master's Guide, page 37|
- The above implies that NPCs and PCs are the same thing - which they are not, and completely ignores the fact that PCs are built for a party - only to fill a role within, not to do everything. D&D is not a solo game, it is a group experience. It would be fine to state that "I do/do not prefer to utilize the thought process of the SGT" but to try to rationalize it using links from the DMG with a very flawed thought process that ignores the true concept of PCs is just wholly wrong. Of course, most individuals following it are min/maxers who have personality types that prevent productive community game play (which is why they find such success on the internet instead). As such, I ban that type of rationale. 16:58, 18 September 2009 (MDT)
- What is (in your mind) the difference between PCs and NPCs then, aside from who dictates their actions? I don't mean to be antagonistic (seems like a lot of that going around) and I know nothing about this 'guideline' or whatevr, I just don't understand where you're coming from.--220.127.116.11 22:21, 22 September 2009 (MDT)
What so bad about the balance point system? It a compromise between SGTer and more conservative Users. Also you are linking to one of the wikia internal policies (Because it not a creation system, it a universal rating system). Seriously why not ending all this conflicts? Why keep going calling us lower caste, saying your glad most left and reallly simply maintaining all hostilities. Come on, we are all grown up adults I believe. --Dhazriel 18:00, 18 September 2009 (MDT)
- I agree about ending all these conflict; and I hope everyone else does as well. Agree. --Green Dragon 18:22, 18 September 2009 (MDT)
- I have no conflict with anyone, nor am I continuing to do anything even related to the earlier discussions. Actually, it was I who earlier suggested the issue be dropped - so I really don't understand your thought process here. My personal issues with the system is that it facilitates things being created to be balanced according to it - which is an overpowered grade. You do not have to agree nor disagree with this, it is just a personally banned item. That will be the end of this, and I wish you good day. Also, as a subpage of my userpage, I may request its deletion, and I also respectfully requests that you no longer add items added by a banned user. 18:27, 18 September 2009 (MDT)
- Seriously why so bullheaded, I don't need proof, I don't need to understand your reasoning. If you want your players to understand you don't like our rating system then tell them. The only thing you are doing right now is just pissing people off. Tell the wikia rating system is horribly overpowered (even linking to it) call us lower caste, tell you are actually glad the tavern community is gone. Now your saying there no conflict? Shame on you Hooper. (Sorry GD I don,t like bring wikia issue here but I think being berated justify it, as much as I would agreed if someone of the wikia rank would do the same with dandwiki, again my apology.) --Dhazriel 18:33, 18 September 2009 (MDT)
- This page is just another form so that players have reference, and it really isn't a big deal. I only had to discuss wikia because a wikia user came here and broke their ban. Had they not, only my players who needed to know would even be aware of this. Once again, I have no conflict. If you are upset by any statement I have made, then feel free to prove me wrong through long-term actions. On the note of spamming, there is a large difference between an informative link and a spamming link. Many of the users who left have links to their new pages over "there" on their userpages here, which could be argued to be informative. The same applys here. I believe the spam you are discussing is due to the bad-faith reasons that some editors had in providing the links they provided. I'm not encouraging individuals to click a link, I'm providing it as reference. In the mean time, we should all carry along nicely. Thank you for your attention. 18:39, 18 September 2009 (MDT)