Jul 14th 2008 12:13PM Think about it for a minute before you go pointing fingers. He said it was an enchanting recipe. He didn't say it was high-end, and maybe he didn't have to. What blue quality enchanting recipe isn't BoP? Lifestealing? Even most of the green recipes at the 300+ range are BoP, meaning the enchanter has to farm them or be present for the drops himself.
To me, it sounds an awful lot like the guild booted him for learning a pre-300 recipe.
But you have a point. It's likely we're not getting the full story, as it does seem a flimsy reason to boot someone. But if it is as clear as the email made it out to be, getting kicked over a BoE enchanting recipe when all the ones worth a damn are BoP is rather lame on the guild's part.
May 16th 2008 9:15AM Having to spec for instant-cast Arcane Explosion.
May 16th 2008 8:07AM Reincarnation giving a shaman rez sickness.
Druids before Barkskin.
Consecration being the 31-point Ret talent.
Never needing more than 17-20 points in Prot to tank as a warrior.
Apr 9th 2008 9:47AM They did in Shat, anyway. The battlemasters are next to the daily-dungeon quest givers in a little raised cubby of their own.
Mar 14th 2008 8:25PM "to completely revamp a classes/specs playstyle is a problem I think."
Yes, that's why you hear prot paladins complaining about how they're viable tanks post-TBC in a way they really weren't in the legacy release.
Mar 14th 2008 7:41PM "As someone who plays a priest, warrior, and warlock at level 70, I feel like shadow priests are greedy."
Hey now! I'm a raiding shadow priest who's quite comfortable with certain specs being strongest in one venue. I don't particularly feel I need to be on par with those who have the most viable specs for PvP. I agree with Drysc that it shouldn't have to be perfectly balanced for all specs to have viability in PvP, just like not all specs are suitable for certain roles for PvE.
As someone pointed out in the comment thread on the tanking issues article, "just because people can't do something with a class doesn't mean it's set in stone that it can't be done." Creative people will find a way to make their favorite spec work for them in whatever venue they choose to frequent.
Feb 17th 2008 8:04AM Parent here, sounding off since people seem so bothered by the fact that the "children might be hurt".
First, it's not a website's responsibility to monitor their content. It's YOUR responsibility to check periodically to make sure the websites you've approved for your child still meet your criteria. Passing the buck off on the web writers and editors isn't going to lessen your part in this, so stop trying. The rest of us parents are sick of you doing it, because we get called out for it. Instead of telling everyone else to "think of the children", why don't YOU think of the children and actually teach them some decent parenting skills so they don't learn to foist their responsibilites off on someone else? Or is it too hard for you to admit your own culpability?
Secondly, it was clearly marked as NSFW with censor bars over all the naughty bits on the image that was visible. That's the responsibility you claim they don't have: they didn't have to tell you or censor the image. But they did. For you and your continued employment, if you're reading this at work. Complaining that people could get fired over this is pointless: it's marked as NSFW. You click, your fault. Not theirs.
Feb 15th 2008 8:53AM "I feel with all of WoW's major baddies taken out by (in Lore terms) random adventurers, it kind of makes the major figures like Thrall or Jaina seem fairly powerless, as all they do is stand around and delegate to you, the player. The universe should have heroes, not managers."
I understand where you're coming from, but you're missing the bigger picture. Be it a game or not, WoW is a world simulation for every role, including the NPCs. As a part of that simulation, Thrall and Jaina aren't in positions where they can drop everything they're doing and ride off to lead their armies into battle against epic foes anymore. They're not heading up ragtag bands of survivors and emigrants; they have nations and cities and peoples to oversee and protect. Delegation is the smartest thing any leader could do, and it makes sense for WoW to heed that with their kingdom simulations.
Feb 5th 2008 9:42AM I can see what a lot of people are saying in response to this, that while it's a violation of the TOS/EULA there are certain grey areas to it. The same could be said with any law. I know I've logged onto my husband's account before to get him to a raid while he was dealing with housework/the kids/on the phone/out getting smokes, whatever. If Blizz came down on me for it, I really couldn't blame them: by the strict letter of their law, I violated the contract I sign every time I log in. I'd be unhappy, but I broke a binding agreement. I'd have to live with the results.
A lot of people forget that Blizzard is not a democracy, and the self-entitlement that usually comes from living in a "free society" doesn't apply. Every time you sign into the game, you are living in the Republic of Blizzard, and you must follow their rules and their laws.
@whoever posted the comment that "most people buy gold and the rest lie about it". Nice paraphrasing of another popular activity, but ultimately untrue. I've never purchased gold. If I had, I would have had my epic flying mount and other assorted luxuries months ago. I'd edit that to read "lazy people buy gold, and the rest work for what they have".
Feb 5th 2008 9:06AM I don't know if I'd call it immoral, but I'd definitely call it lazy. With 2000 +heal, you have ~6-700 spell damage without changing out your gear. I've farmed as a Holy priest before and after the change to +heal: it's not that difficult anymore. If you need to suck up another person's dailies resulting in them not having the gold it's sheer laziness, pure and simple.