Grimrock

Verus wrote:

Zo Kath Ra wrote:

UglyBastard wrote:See what I did there?

Yes, it's called a straw man.

No, it's just the logical extension of what you said. It is at worst a reduction to absurdity, except it can't possibly qualify: if discussing the mere possibility of adding in a supra-item bonus to deepen gameplay is wrong, then what suggestions could possibly be acceptable?

I'm a little distressed at how actively this discussion is being driven away from the actual suggestion and towards debating whether or not it's acceptable to even propose the suggestion at all. It's absolutely baffling.

What is absolutely baffling to me is the level of hypocrisy in your posts. You should run for office.

We *are* discussing the possibility of adding in set bonuses, and some of us disagree that adding set bonuses is worth the time. You take that to mean that no suggestions are possibly acceptable? Who is "actively misinterpreting" posts again?

Early in the thread I asked about the difference between asking the developers to add in set bonuses, for example making the Valor "set" provide light, and opening the console and adding the light effect yourself if you think it would be "cool". I even asked you to carefully think about it, but it's clear none of you have. Instead you fill the thread with hyperbole and invectives. In fact, when simply asked questions to justify the idea, the apparent supporters have resorted to attacking those of us who asked the questions. It's rather obvious now that you're just trying to hide the fact that the only real justification has been presented:

The question "what does it matter?" can be answered with "it would be a goody that makes [some] people [more] happy".

And that's fine, but if it makes you more happy then why not simply use the console to give yourselves whatever set bonus you think is best? This would be the most flexible solution to make everyone happy.

oodyboo wrote:if it makes you more happy then why not simply use the console to give yourselves whatever set bonus you think is best?

Again, oodyboo, you fail to provide any reasonable discussion and just keep throwing pointless arguments that hold no value whatsoever. If you want to discuss with us why a set bonus is fine, sure. But give some good reasons.

The whole "There's no point to suggest something, since you can implement it yourself using mods or the console." is a moot point. How about AH releases a completely empty dungeon as their next expansion, with a small manual on how to add your own walls, pits, monsters and items. I'm sure that would make you happy, because then you can make your own dungeon to your heart's content.

But not so for the rest of us. People are going to play the game as is, and only after that might they consider messing around with it. I didn't even know when I had my set complete, and where's the choice in giving myself light for the entire set, if I could've given myself light without the entire set.

No, we're not asking the developers to go back and change the original game. We're merely suggesting it could be a cool feature both in future official AH dungeons, as well as custom usermade dungeons.

Is English your first language? This is a sincere question, and I'm sorry if that's at all insulting to you. I can't help but feel that perhaps you aren't quite following the flow of the conversation completely.

But for now, we seem to have dug ourselves into a hole---perhaps we ought to try climbing out? While interpersonal disagreements like this clearly have no place on this forum, I think it may still be in everyone's best interest to systematically address each other's concerns, in order that we may arrive at a mutual understanding. So:

We *are* discussing the possibility of adding in set bonuses, and some of us disagree that adding set bonuses is worth the time.

I'm afraid I'm going to have to disagree. While certainly the topic began well enough---despite frankly inadequate arguments both for and against---, right around here the argument became personal. In the linked post you, again, actively did not respond to any of his arguments in favor; instead, all you did was level a few insults at him, unprovoked. This may not have been intentional on your part (and I suppose I can see why you would focus more on defending yourself than debating the actual topic), but it's pretty blatant.

You take that to mean that no suggestions are possibly acceptable?

No, I mean that the particular statement he made several posts above is an equally valid argument against any and all possible suggestions; that is to say, it's an invalid argument.

In fact, when simply asked questions to justify the idea, the apparent supporters have resorted to attacking those of us who asked the questions. It's rather obvious now that you're just trying to hide the fact that the only real justification has been presented

Neither of you have responded to the more relevant arguments in favor, which are predicated more upon verisimilitude, stylistic fit, and depth of gameplay than any notion of added reward. I would be much mollified if you would please try to stop---yes, that's right---actively ignoring the contents of our posts. I would also appreciate it if you would please stop insinuating that the only sort of player who could suggest such a concept as a 'set bonus' must simply be the greedy fools who "want more virtual rewards".

I would also like to agree with everything Thels posted above. Well said.

Thels wrote: We're merely suggesting it could be a cool feature both in future official AH dungeons, as well as custom usermade dungeons.

Fair point, and I think this pretty much wraps this up.

No more arguing please guys.

Daniel.

I think set bonuses would be a nice little reward for exploring well enough to find all the pieces, and just add more flavor in general.