(ok so 63.4% of this post was just so I could say "can't shine a turd", 21.3% was just to disagree with Chris, 10.7% to show Mike I'm not in a bad mood, and the remaining 48.2% was to show I don't want to do math)

Moderator: Admin
And as long as we are diametrically opposed.. All is right in the world.GM_Chris wrote:I have no idea what you are saying but when I saw you log in I knew you were posting on this thread.
Even though I dont understand I will have to dissagree with you just so we can add drama and that you are Todd and for no other reason.
Gotcha. But still...you could just say no? *grins* It seems like the issue isn't with the spells, persay...it's with what gets through.Ovak Stonecrusher wrote: These are the combos we're talking about. The player knew they wanted a flame thrower of mass destruction in year one but that we would never approve such a thing. Thus the patience is the key...
See, that's not really true. As long as spells follow the same end results as any other skill why do you need to see it? If my spell takes 14 steps that I need to follow, but in the end I can now swing poison for a combat, why do you as a fellow player need to know it's internal workings? You don't.Jaycen Blackhawk wrote: This would mean no more super secret recipes or spells, but it would also mean less game stops and less need to explain an effect to another player.