You can play any class you want for it. A mage might not make much sense.

Please note the word 'just'.

Yeah, I see the word 'just', but it's not used in the way you're implying it is.

Here, 'just' is used in the way 'merely' would be: as in "a warrior isn't 'merely' a farmer...". This indicates that a farmer who picks up a pitchfork and tries to fight isn't a warrior.

Further evidence that this is the intended meaning comes from the context of the whole article. You can't just pick one word and read it in isolation from its intended meaning and context in order to fabricate an argument.

No, you're right. I was going to argue again, but you're clearly right on this one.

That said, I stand by my basic point: David's just trying to present role-play possibilities. Don't try to tear him down for an off-handed remark.

Yeah, cool. Not trying to tear anything down. Just that I often find these "so you want to be a..." articles go a bit beyond presenting "role-play possibilities". The tone often seems to be "if you're not doing it this way, you're doing it wrong". Perhaps that's just me reading it that way though.

Stag, he's just giving people some ideas, and tying those ideas into Lore. You'll be okay.

Would you like him to put a qualifier in every single sentence? Better to let the readers figure out that it's not a mandate from the heavens for themselves than to mess up the flow of the writing with such equivocation, IMO.

Aerei, what you've said makes no sense as a response to what I was saying. Of course people would realise it's not a mandate from the heavens ... that doesn't change the fact that the general tone of the articles is that "this is how you should be doing it".

I was talking about tone of the articles in general and the sentence I quoted was an example. Clearly this is too complex for you to understand though. I would've explained this in my initial statements, however, as you point out that kind of qualifier would mess with the flow of the writing.

Try again.