Apr 3rd 2012 4:30PM As a side note--I've experienced the opposite of prejudice on my female characters--people seem a lot more forgiving when I have a hard time healing or tanking certain content on a female character.
Apr 3rd 2012 4:27PM I agree about the armor thing...honestly, as an engaged strait male I'd rather not have to feel guilty (self-imposed, not by my fiance) about my draenai's clothes just because I can't stand the linebacker-with-tiny-legs look of the male draenai (and my shammy can't be a dwarves b/c dwarves shouldn't be casters!)
But as far as the quest dialog goes? I'm really not trying to be insensitive here...but that really doesn't seem like harassment to me. It sounds like flirting. Granted, flirting becomes harassment if the guy keeps going when the girl is protesting, but that's not happening here. I can't link the specific quest text, but I *know* I've gotten similar comments from female goblins (on Alliance characters, too!). It's flirting. Ji doesn't sound like a predator to me--he sounds like he's a bit out-of-touch, and cute in a feel-sorry-for-him kind of way. The fact that it's a male pandaren to a female pandaren--neither of which would be considered sex symbols--just adds to the innocent humor.
Aug 29th 2010 9:18AM The only radical flying mount I can think of is a dirt bike.
Aug 24th 2010 8:21AM GM's are there to be helpful and enforce the rules. Not to use their powers to try to change d-bags.
Yes, Erajorma acted out of turn. But the GM's response should have been to drop the conversation, or give a short ban, or whatever the established protocol is. And that's the point--GM's have a job with limits. Blizzard doesn't just decide certain people have the power to do whatever they want.
Let's say a cop pulls you over for speeding. You act like a total moron to said cop--a terrible idea. So what does he do? He gives you the full ticket, like he's supposed to. What if, to teach you a lesson in manners, he decided to kick out your taillight and ticket you for that? Would you still say, "Well, now he knows not to tick off a cop..."
This situation is even more extreme because Era hadn't actually broken any rules--he was just discourteous, which should result in not getting to speak to a GM until he stops. The conversation is actually a bit scary to me when the GM plays out a prewritten message about deleting his name, obviously ignoring everything Era is saying. It would've been funny ("I'm sorry, Dave, I can't do that...") if it wasn't true.
Aug 22nd 2010 4:57PM I agree with the general idea of the OP, but I guess this is a rare case where I'd rather have my peanut butter and chocolate separate. I love WoW. I love tabletop. But the more my tabletop becomes like WoW, the less I like it. I suspect the reverse would be true as well.
One game can't answer every desire, and every positive step for immersion and roleplay is a step backwards for smoothness and playability. One could argue that matchmaking systems in FPS' are replacing the good old days when you had to call your buddies on the phone and invite them over to your house. But today, if my friends are there, we can all play Brawl together. If they're not, I can play CoD with random people who I really don't need to know better--I just want to shoot them and be shot by them. This is a case where I'd rather not go back to the old days (especially since for me, the old days consisted of taking turns in Mario Party...my palms hurt from the memory).
Anyway, I'd much rather let WoW become more streamlined and accept that if I want a tabletop experience, I can go play tabletop, since no matter what an online MMO does, it'll never match that exact feel.
Jul 4th 2010 4:34PM They're doing a great job of filling in the gaps, and any storyline involving the Old Gods is good with me. I do wish they had chosen a different Lovecraft character to name the new one after--Yogg Saron and Soggoth both seem to come from Yog-Sothoth. Wikipedia alone lists over 60 Old Ones, so they have a lot to choose from...
Anyway, I doubt we'll see an Old God as a final boss of an expansion simply because that's not their nature. They work behind the scenes. At first I was bothered by the fact that Yogg-Saron came before Arthas, but (1) I seriously doubt he's dead and (2) The Lich King was part of Yogg's machinations anyway. And that's what's so cool--even if other baddies take the spotlight, in reality it's almost always the Old Gods causing it all. We have our little victories each expansion, but they're still down there, plotting....
Jun 20th 2010 9:41PM I have a question that I've been meaning to ask for awhile about RP, and now seems as good a time as any.
With WoW being a comic-fantasy setting that crosses genres and breaks the fourth wall, smattered with a healthy helping of pop culture, what makes it a good medium for serious roleplay? It seems like WoW is more limiting than anything--small selection of emotes, game mechanics to work in (what if we were SUPPOSED to wipe? what if I want to be a dark ranger not a hunter?) and of course the pollution of griefers.
Why not just do traditional tabletop if you want to do some collaborative storytelling? If you don't live nearby, skype or AIM. Now those won't be massively multiplayer, but to be honest, aren't more random players a hindrance more than a boon, since even on the best servers there will be griefers or people who just have a different story mindset than you? I could really only see myself playing with RL friends because I know our ideas about what makes a good story line up.
Please know that I don't have anything against RP--if you enjoy it, go for it. I just don't see how WoW is a better medium than standard tabletop.
Jun 18th 2010 5:45PM I may get stoned for this, but here goes. Moonkin form has no reason to exist. What is a druid, in conventional tabletop and fantasy? It's a nature-based magic user. Some heal, some cast natural wrath at their foes, and some take on animal forms. Moonkin form is just an example of people wanting what other people have even if there's no reason to have it (ie...shamans who want flying form just because they have one "shapeshift").
You turn into a cat so you can do things cats can do. Same with bear, cheetah, seal, and crow. But with Moonkin form, are you turning into some creature that can cast? Humans can cast just fine! The whole idea of a form that augments your abilities instead of completely changing them doesn't seem to fly with what a druid is supposed to be. It falls in the same category of stormcrows mining with their beaks.
This type of stuff is what makes the druid class less appealing to me. People tell me to play it because it's powerful and versatile. But I want to play a class because I like the feel. And like Fox said, what is wrath? What is moonfire? Abilities like entangling roots feel right--they're nature spells. But I still have no idea what wrath is supposed to be. Or, what my bear is supposed to be doing when he casts (ugh) Feral Faerie Fire.
Druids are a fantastically interesting class that, in my humble opinion, would get ten times better if there was more of a focus on the design intent of the class--"feeling" like a druid--and less on satisfying the complainers who want to do everything anyone else can do.
Jun 11th 2010 10:25PM To be honest, I play classes more for flavor that power or even playstyle. My two mains are as different as can be--a mage and a prot/fury warrior, and I love them both. I like my affliction warlock as well--but again, mainly for the flavor. To me, I play a warlock because it's different from other classes--so I'll go with the spec that has a different focus from hunters and mages. Keep in mind, I'm still referring to flavor more than actual mechanics. I could care less about which classes are the most powerful--I don't do anything higher than heroics anyway.
I guess I've always liked the underdog and the sense of danger. As a mage, I'm relying totally on my intelligence to save me from things much stronger than I am. I don't "defend" myself as much as simply blast away, run away, and freeze them, hoping to just barely squeeze out victory. Lots of people don't like that feel--and lots of people don't like Frodo as much as Aragorn. That's just me though...
Even as a warrior, I still get that sense of peril. As fury, I'm not very defensive at all--I'm just wailing on things to shock-and-awe them to death before they can react. Even as prot, I'm running (read-intercepting) back and forth, desperately trying to keep the monsters away from my friends, without being able to rely on Holy, Natural, or Runic magic.
Jun 11th 2010 4:21PM More abilities does not a rotation make. Warlocks are fun, I will admit that. But bragging about your immensely complex rotation because it involves lots of abilities doesn't make any sense. "Is X up? No=cast X. Yes= is Y up? No=cast Y" ad infinitum. That's not a rotation. That's Q&A.
I still don't understand people saying Arcane is mindless--especially compared to Fire, which seems to fall in in "Is X up?" model, and frost, which seems to just be responding to procs.
With arcane, every cast is a decision. Do I have the mana to keep chain casting AB? If I try to keep full stacks up, will I lose them because the mob dies to early? Would it be better to cast AM at lower stacks because otherwise they'll time out? Is the mob at low enough health that an Arcane Barrage would be more efficient? Do I need to be moving? When should I move to keep those stacks up? Can this mob be slowed, and would it help? Can I steal anything? Is anyone cursed?